No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ESET Inspect vs WatchGuard EPDR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (5th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
33rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WatchGuard EPDR
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WatchGuard EPDR is 1.6%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.4%
WatchGuard EPDR1.6%
ESET Inspect1.1%
Other93.9%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
Moshiur-Rahman Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at IOPoint.com
Provides reliable and comprehensive internet security solutions without significant system slowdowns
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side, we utilize it on our Windows Server.  The platform has improved our organization's security by providing comprehensive antivirus and internet security solutions. It is fast and…
NJ
Section Head, Information Technology at a transportation company with 201-500 employees
Using cloud-based console for software inventory management and email alerts
I have no idea if I use some automation functions. I can't find any disadvantages; maybe that is because many companies haven't used it. I would prefer to see some features such as AI in antivirus solutions. I appreciate reporting, but it could be better with monthly reporting or auto-generated monthly reports.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I like that the product has behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, collecting relevant indicators such as hashes, IP addresses, or domains efficiently and can detect and block malicious attacks with firewalls."
"The product has an intuitive dashboard."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"It'll not slow down your system when compared to others."
"It is easy to use."
"The product's most valuable features are massive user and feature intelligence exploit detection."
"I don't have to do much monitoring with it; I don't have to have anybody manually looking at this, it gives us reports, and it lets us know if something needs to be addressed, and we can easily address it."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"The dashboard management feature is valuable."
"The detection capabilities for malicious activities are effective."
"The most valuable features of Panda Security Adaptive Defense are the useful hardware information it provides, light on resources, controllable from the console, remote scan functionality, and the blocking of a lot of URL malware."
"Since implementing this solution, we have not had any trouble with malware."
"The technical support is excellent, the technical team knows what they are doing and any request or question we have gets fixed within a matter of minutes."
"The most valuable part of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is its overall effectiveness as a good and decent security solution, providing comprehensive security which improves protection for devices significantly."
"I have seen some positive impact from using WatchGuard EPDR because it's less painful than the previous product we were using, has more functionality, and is easier to manage."
"The protection from malware is the most important feature. It has some endpoint information about the vehicle of the virus, malware, etc. It is also stable and easy to install, and they also provide good technical support."
 

Cons

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"Cortex XDR could improve its sales support team, including better commission structures and referral programs."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."
"There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions."
"The deployment is pretty hard."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"The platform's price could be better."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"Panda is the most painful endpoint solution I've ever had to work with except SentinelOne."
"Although the antivirus solution is so good that we've never suffered from an attack, we've had a few problems with false positives where they weren't correct."
"Needs a better way to scan the hardware to detect whether it's valid."
"Panda Security Adaptive Defense can improve by including the intrusion and prevention system not only on their most expensive platform."
"The AV and scanning features could be a little bit better."
"The only part I really don't use as much is their firewall. It's a bit superfluous. Most people have their own firewall in place, so they don't really need that part portion of the solution."
"Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is not compatible with certain network devices like access points, switches, or routers, which would be an area for improvement."
"An area for improvement would be the software deployment to seamlessly deploy software packages across multiple machines simultaneously, and to enhance the remote monitoring capabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."
"Licensing for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR can be costly, especially when it comes to a hundred users. A license is required for each user, and the subscription must be renewed on a yearly basis."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution."
"It has a higher cost than other solutions, like CrowdStrike or Microsoft’s EDR tools, but it reduces the cost of our operations because it’s a new generation antivirus tool."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
"The solution's pricing is better compared to other products."
"Our licensing fee is 1M Euro per month, so it is about 80 Euro's per user."
"The price is excellent."
"There is a license needed to use this solution and it is approximately $30 annually."
"I don't think Panda's license is too expensive, but they're charging more than it's worth. It's a yearly license. For 1,000 endpoints, it's around $18,000."
"Customers need to pay monthly licensing costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense, which is not expensive."
"The solution is priced well for what features it provides."
"The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business45
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise48
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ESET Inspect?
The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward. We purchase soft keys, install them, and manage the licen...
What needs improvement with ESET Inspect?
One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security.
What is your primary use case for ESET Inspect?
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side...
What needs improvement with WatchGuard EPDR?
I would not be able to say what areas of WatchGuard EPDR have improved, as I do not work with the product myself so m...
What is your primary use case for WatchGuard EPDR?
My clients use Panda Adaptive Defense 360 for security purposes.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
Panda Adaptive Defense 360
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Indra, Valea AB, Fineit, Aemcom, Data Solutions INC., Gloucestershire NHS, Golden Star Resources Ltd, Hispania Racing Team, Instituto Dos Museus e da ConserÊo, Escuelas Pias Provincia Emaus, Axiom Housing Association, Municipality of Bjuv, Lesedi Nuclear, Mullsj_ municipality, Eng. skolan Norr AB, Dalakraft AB, Peter Green Haulage Ltd
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. WatchGuard EPDR and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.