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

ESET Inspect vs WatchGuard Firebox comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 15, 2026

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)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
122
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
49th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WatchGuard Firebox
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
143
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (12th), Firewalls (11th), Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (4th), Anti-Malware Tools (7th), Application Control (4th), Unified Threat Management (UTM) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.0%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WatchGuard Firebox is 1.4%, up from 0.8% 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 Networks3.8%
WatchGuard Firebox1.4%
ESET Inspect1.0%
Other93.8%
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.
Cees Van Den Haak - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Manager at Bouwbedrijf de Vries en Verburg BV
A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that you can manage and react to vulnerabilities and attacks on all the workstations or laptops. You can put certain workstations and isolation. With ESET PROTECT, you see only one machine that is protected, but with ESET Inspect, you see all the machines that are protected in an environment.
reviewer2805000 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior System Administrator at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
Centralized security management has improved VPN reliability and simplified daily operations
WatchGuard Firebox is a strong and reliable platform overall, but there are a few areas where improvements could make the experience even better. One area is the user interface and navigation in some management tools. While the platform is powerful, certain configurations and troubleshooting workflows can feel less intuitive compared to some newer cloud-native firewall platforms. Another point is reporting and log analysis. Although the logging features are very useful, deeper analytics and more customizable reporting dashboards would make security monitoring much more effective. Firmware upgrades and policy synchronization can sometimes require careful planning to avoid security interruptions. Overall, the core security and VPN functionality are very solid, but improving usability, reporting, and automation would make the platform even stronger. One area that could be improved is the learning curve for new administrators. While experienced engineers can work with the platform effectively, some advanced networking and security configurations can be a bit complex for junior technicians. More guided configuration workflows, smarter recommendations, and simplified troubleshooting tools would make onboarding easier. Another improvement would be more flexible reporting customization for executive-level and client-facing reports.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It blocks malicious files, prevents attacks, and doesn't require many updates because it is a very light application."
"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."
"Cortex XDR can integrate the firewalls and determine the tendencies of the attacks. It's a new generation antivirus, with protection endpoints and detection response. It is very easy to use and everybody can operate the solution."
"If you are looking for security, mainly for advanced threat prevention from ransomware and malware attacks, I would recommend Cortex."
"Technical support is the best in class, in my opinion, because they have invested heavily in research and development."
"The initial setup isn't too bad."
"It has absolutely improved the way our organization functions, we are more secure, it is giving us more peace of mind, and it has found malicious activity happening on our endpoints that probably would not have been detected if we didn't have it."
"The biggest positive impact I see from Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a significant reduction in the number of people required to manage it."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"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."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"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."
"Going with the Firebox is a no-brainer."
"The advice I would give to anyone considering WatchGuard Firebox is that it is a good product, despite what they say about it not being in the Gartner quadrant leaders."
"I like their management features a lot. Their System Manager server as well the System Manager software make managing them, and tracking changes, very easy and complete."
"It's hard to pick one feature over another. But if I had to pick one, the UTM would be the most valuable because of the notification. I get notified via email if there is any type of threat detection or alert, telling me something is wrong."
"The security that is used for defending from the attacks is very good."
"The reporting aspect of the solution is what is most valuable to us."
"Overall, we are quite happy with the Firebox solution and we have not seen any issues so far."
"Cloud integration is one of the best features."
 

Cons

"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"The installation should be easier and the Palo Alto pre-sales and sales teams should have more information on the product because they don't know what they are selling."
"The product's pricing could be better."
"I have run into some detection issues with Cortex XDR. It needs to be better at detection of internal attacks."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"Dashboards do not allow everyone to see what's happening."
"The downside to the solution is that there are a large number of false positives."
"We have found that there are times Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks does not detect some of the viruses, we have to use another protection solution called Kaspersky."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The platform's price could be better."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Last year, I had an issue with one of the Fireboxes going down. It was overheated, because my server room became overheated and this fried it."
"They are working on cloud-based options. However, they do not have the options fully functional in their solution at this time."
"Cloud-based central administration of all devices from one point would be nice (although there is always an added risk regarding this)."
"The few issues that we have had, such as not knowing where to go, they have been answered quickly."
"There were a little bit of problems with the tool's updates, making it an area where improvements are needed."
"The main area for improvement in WatchGuard Firebox is exposing more of the technical configuration in the cloud management, as it would take away the need to do local management on those devices."
"WatchGuard Firebox is a strong and reliable platform overall, but there are a few areas where improvements could make the experience even better."
"The user interface and configuration can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price was fine."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"Very costly product."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"This is an expensive solution."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"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 platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"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."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"We paid $4000 in AUD for WatchGuard Firebox per year. There were no additional costs."
"We only license our corporate one and the one we have at our DR site, we don't worry about the branches. It doesn't pay for us to license the ones at the branches. What they charge for what they call basic maintenance is extremely high for those little fireboxes."
"The pricing is competitive."
"Their price point worked, which is the reason why we stayed with WatchGuard."
"It is an entry-level product, so the price is cheap."
"The cost three years ago was about $800."
"The price is very good."
"I spent $600 or $800 on this product and I'm paying a couple of hundred dollars a year in a subscription service to keep the lights on, on it... It works out to $100 or $200 a year if you buy several years at once. It's fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business50
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise57
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business104
Midsize Enterprise30
Large Enterprise17
 

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,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your primary use case for WatchGuard Firebox?
We are providing our services to all WatchGuard customers in the region.
What is your primary use case for WatchGuard Firebox?
We just use it as a secondary WiFi device. We're a small office and we needed to set up a WiFi device for a few of ou...
What is your primary use case for WatchGuard Firebox?
We're a hospital and we use it for developing our incoming and outgoing policies, and we also use it for VPN.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response, WatchGuard Application Control, WatchGuard Data Loss Prevention, WatchGuard Gateway AntiVirus, WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Ellips, Diecutstickers.com, Clarke Energy, NCR, Wrest Park, Homeslice Pizza, Fortessa Tableware Solutions, The Phoenix Residence
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. WatchGuard Firebox and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.