Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud vs Sangfor Endpoint Secure 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)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Kaspersky Endpoint Security...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
24th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Ransomware Protection (9th)
Sangfor Endpoint Secure
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
27th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 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 Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is 0.8%, up from 0.7% 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%
Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud0.7%
Sangfor Endpoint Secure0.8%
Other95.1%
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.
Zunair Aftab - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports Engineer at Rawad IT Solutions
Security features excel while management tools face challenges
Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud has proven to be a robust and comprehensive solution for endpoint protection. So far, no major negative features have been observed. However, email security integration with Microsoft 365 has room for improvement. In a recent real-world incident, a company received 10 phishing emails, of which only three were blocked by the system. Enhancing detection accuracy to block 7 or more would significantly improve trust and effectiveness. With the on-premises version, there's a known issue where assigning a device to a new group results in it being auto-assigned back to the previous group. Fixing this bug would greatly streamline device management. Additionally, in the cloud version, once a device is assigned to a user, it cannot be reassigned without deleting the user or the device entirely. It would be far more user-friendly if the platform allowed simple reassignment or de-assignment, returning the device to an "unassigned" state. As for automated behavioral analysis, while current functionality is based on machine learning, upgrading to true AI-powered detection could bring substantial improvements. Ideally, the system should proactively flag potential threats, and offer administrators the option to either allow or block applications based on intelligent risk analysis
OA
Coordinator Associate at National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases
Quick threat response and behavior analysis while enhancing network security
The main use case is usually related to security. It deals with attacks that come day-to-day such as zero-day attacks and APT attacks. Our main task is to secure the network infrastructure in the hospital where I work It facilitates the departments of IT and other departments to procure and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I generally believe that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is probably the best in the market right now."
"It is easy to use."
"Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about."
"The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing."
"Best solution for avoiding security breaches, malware attacks, and other kinds of security issues."
"It'll not slow down your system when compared to others."
"The solution allows us to gain remote access without the user's knowledge and take the necessary actions on the device."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"The platform's ability to update the database from my device and manage user profiles is quite effective."
"In Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud, anti-phishing and anti-malware are two very powerful aspects."
"I find the EDR service valuable as it adds extra protection and provides a centralized view."
"We had the cloud suite of KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud, and its monitoring was fine."
"It is a powerful tool for zero-day attack prevention."
"The product works perfectly to prevent malware in our organization."
"In terms of software performance, it has been effective in providing good security."
"Kaspersky has a Cloud Discovery feature. There is no template in Kaspersky. They provide a temporary risk assessment of the cloud services. For example, if we want to block public storage services like OneDrive or Google Drive, we need to specify each individually. The main difference is that Kaspersky's process takes more time because it requires individual input."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"The tool's most valuable features are control access, endpoint security, and load balancing of ISPs."
"It has a quick response time, threat intelligence, cybersecurity features, quick report generation, behavior analysis, dynamic detection, and quarantine features."
"I like the tool's honeypot feature. Some features include having a honeypot to detect attacks in a certain area. Additionally, there is RDP protection, which means that when we remote into our server or any endpoint, we must enter a password as a second layer of security. It can also integrate with next-generation firewalls."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The user-friendliness of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is particularly impressive. Even with basic technical knowledge, users can easily navigate the system, make changes, and implement updates."
 

Cons

"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"If he is using a smaller company, he can depend on some other tools because Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a bit expensive."
"The product's pricing needs improvement. They could provide more discounts. Additionally, the dashboard and control panel could be enhanced."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"The main issue I could point out is the offline agents and the way that it is missing."
"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR does not detect malicious activity like in other anti-virus solutions like Trend Micro and Windows with Cisco."
"Kaspersky's cloud solution should be improved because the on-premises features are unavailable in the cloud."
"Kaspersky's global ranking has been on the decline."
"Its high CPU usage also slows down devices, particularly those with lower specifications like Core i3."
"Kaspersky doesn't provide local support."
"It requires specific expertise or certified professionals to deploy the product. There is a need to expand the offerings to various industries covering different-sized businesses."
"Sometimes, the tool consumes a lot of resources from the endpoints, making it an area of concern where improvements are required since it currently consumes a little bit of RAM."
"One area where the product could be improved is in its delivery and installation process."
"Recently, there was a company which was attacked by phishing emails, and out of 10, it was only blocking three emails."
"I face issues while migrating from Kaspersky to Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"It would be much more convenient if the migration tool could be installed directly on the customer's VMs, enabling a smoother migration process to the new infrastructure, with potential restrictions addressed accordingly."
"Sometimes, the VPN is not secure and doesn't work properly in Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
"The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure should include healing capabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"Cortex XDR is a costly solution."
"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 don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"The product is averagely priced."
"The solution is moderately priced and cannot be considered an expensive or cheap tool."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is a cost-effective solution."
"The product’s price is flexible."
"The pricing is favorable, and there are no additional expenses associated with using the product."
"I find Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud more accessible in terms of pricing."
"The platform is expensive."
"The solution is reasonably priced."
"The solution is cheap. It is cheaper than other products by 15-20 percent."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure is not a cheap solution."
"We were using Hyper-V. So, we switched to Sangfor because of the pricing."
"Its "pay as you grow" model offers cost-effectiveness compared to major cloud providers."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure's pricing is cheap. I rate it seven out of ten."
"Price-wise, Sangfor Endpoint Secure can be considered a competitively priced product in the market as it offers quite low prices compared to other solutions."
"The product is expensive compared to other vendors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise3
 

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 needs improvement with Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered. It would be better if it were a simplified version with fewe...
What is your primary use case for Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
Sangfor Endpoint Secure is easy to handle with its user-friendly interface. The four engines it utilizes for endpoint...
What advice do you have for others considering Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
At first, people might not understand the interface, which is why it should be simplified. However, once they underst...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.