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

Logpoint vs Zscaler Client Connector comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 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
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Logpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
40th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (34th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (30th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (15th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (20th)
Zscaler Client Connector
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
25th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Logpoint is 1.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zscaler Client Connector is 0.6%, up from 0.3% 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 Networks3.7%
Zscaler Client Connector0.6%
Logpoint1.0%
Other94.7%
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.
Rifat Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at Corporate Projukti Limited
Has lacked proper integration and consistent support communication
I selected Logpoint for the pricing as it is reasonable. I am located in Bangladesh, South Asia, Dhaka. I have tried to contact Exabeam by mail repeatedly, but there has been no response. My company, Corporate Projukti Limited, including my Bangladesh area head, technical director, and team manager, have sent emails to contact Exabeam solution, but there is no response. There is already a distributor in Bangladesh. The weakness with Logpoint is UEBA. UEBA is recommended, but not extra. Exabeam's UEBA is an extra feature. SOAR is extra, but Logpoint's product measurement is 40 or 50. There is a 10% difference with the UEBA and SOAR, so Logpoint is weak there. I would appreciate extra features in Logpoint such as SOAR. SOAR and UEBA are included features in Logpoint. Logpoint's UEBA is a weak point, while Exabeam's UEBA has extra AI through automation. Exabeam has a license included, and the extra license is an add-on. In Logpoint, it is included, which makes it a weak point.
DA
IT Support Admin at Kuehne & Nagel Inc.
Client activity has been monitored efficiently through in-depth log analysis and traffic filtering
I use the Zscaler speed test, and it is very nice. We use some logs from Zscaler Client Connector to collect data and see what is happening, such as if there is an interruption or something. There is a specific tunnel version that we have to use because, depending on the internet provider, some of them have lower speed, so we have some issues. This is because of the provider, not from Zscaler. We use Office 365 services and Office applications, and because some connections are slow and they do not have full coverage from the internet provider, we have some issues. If the speed is slow for Zscaler Client Connector connection, then we have issues because if the speed is not good, then Zscaler Client Connector goes down. This may be because they put some policy. Of course, if you use Office 365 services such as Outlook, the minimum bandwidth is 5 megabits and more, so this causes issues if the users do not have a good remote connection. This depends on the companies and the users, so they need to fix it. This is not from us or our company. It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful. When we go to logs, we understand what is happening.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices."
"The best feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is that it collects logs from different sections such as the endpoint, the network, and the cloud, making it easy to investigate alerts, collect some of the investigation packages related to the infected machines, and provide live response."
"One of the things that I enjoy the most is using policy extensions. It's like having host firewalls to control USB connections. I think it's a wonderful tool to restrict use when connecting to our computers. Another important tool is Home Insights. That is an add-on to the Cortex solution. I like that because we can see all the vulnerabilities in the environment and control what assets are connected to our network."
"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is its machine-learning capabilities. Additionally, there is full integration with other solutions."
"The solution allows us to gain remote access without the user's knowledge and take the necessary actions on the device."
"I've found the solution to be highly scalable for enterprises."
"The interface is easy to use and it is more up to date than our previous solution."
"Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The UEBA component, as well as the SOAR component, are some of the most valuable features of Logpoint."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"Technical support is responsive and very friendly."
"The main advantage of Logpoint is the support service. They reply within ten minutes to an hour to our queries."
"The most valuable feature, which is endpoint security, is included in Logpoint, and an extra feature is the integration."
"The flexibility of the search feature and the solution's analytics features are the most valuable parts of the solution, and it's also very user-friendly."
"I would say that it's a good product; it's very stable, and the support is very good."
"They basically charge you in a better way."
"Zscaler Client Connector is quite scalable, and I would rate its scalability as nine or ten out of ten."
"The real-time analytics feature in Zscaler Client Connector is another valuable feature called Digital Experience, or ZDX, which can easily identify the root cause of issues accessing public or internal resources and provide good analysis so relevant teams can quickly resolve them, making it a very good tool that helps customers."
"Zscaler Client Connector has eliminated VPN bottlenecks and outages, improved user productivity with instant secure access, and reduced help desk tickets related to VPN issues, overcoming 60% of VPN-related problems while allowing faster onboarding of remote users and better enforcement of zero-trust security policies."
"I'd rate the solution nine out of ten."
"The best features of Zscaler Client Connector are that it gives the client a much more transparent experience, as they don't have to worry about connecting to a VPN."
"It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful; when we go to logs, we understand what is happening."
"It is very important to see what is happening between the user and the applications that we have, and to filter the traffic from outbound traffic and inside traffic."
"The solution operates in the background seamlessly without the user noticing."
 

Cons

"Cortex XDR is trickier to configure than other Palo Alto products. This is one area where we are not so satisfied."
"It is not a suitable solution if you are looking for a single product with multiple features such as DLP, encryption, rollback, etc."
"The solution should add unwanted malicious hash values to a block list so that whenever the action is triggered, it will automatically prevent the malicious content."
"There's an overall lack of features."
"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."
"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."
"This is a very costly product."
"We had a problem with getting our older endpoints up to date, but their newest updates have been really good. I've been pleased with it in terms of what our needs are. It's doing what we want it to do."
"Logpoint is not flexible. Its documentation is not user-friendly."
"One of the things we faced last year was that we had some memory issues with the server running. We were running them as virtual services, and we were facing some performance issues. Back then, there were some things that had already been solved at the end, but one of the small issues we had was that it was quite memory-consuming. After one upgrade that we did, we faced some performance issues."
"It is complicated to collect daily logs from other systems."
"Logpoint's UEBA is a weak point, while Exabeam's UEBA has extra AI through automation."
"I know that they have user behavior analytics, but it's an extra cost for this feature. It would be nice if it was in with the standard products."
"I would rate the stability of Logpoint as a six out of ten. I have received reports indicating glitches and downtimes with Logpoint."
"My issues with the product are mainly with regard to how it handles collecting logs."
"It needs to improve performance. That's somehow something that others do better."
"There is room for improvement regarding the price of Zscaler Client Connector, as it is one of the most expensive solutions available."
"Zscaler Client Connector is not low in cost; it is definitely on the higher side."
"There is a hard learning curve for Zscaler Client Connector; their support isn't the greatest all the time."
"The stability of Zscaler Client Connector needs improvement, as it often disconnects and reconnects."
"If the speed is slow for Zscaler Client Connector connection, then we have issues because if the speed is not good, then Zscaler Client Connector goes down."
"I rate this product nine out of ten because I have seen some minor instability issues after updates and some room for UI improvement for deeper analytics, with instances of major issues after updating the GCC that required rollbacks."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."
"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 like that they have different types of licenses."
"It has a yearly renewal."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"Cortex XDR's pricing is ok."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"It has a fixed price, which is what I like about LogPoint. I bought the system and paid for it, and I pay maintenance. It is not a consumption model. Most SIEMs or most of the log management systems are consumption-based, which means that you pay for how many logs you have in the system. That's a real problem because logs can grow very quickly in different circumstances, and when you have a variable price model, you never know what you're going to pay. Splunk is notoriously expensive for that reason. If you use Splunk or QRadar, it becomes expensive because there are not just the logs; you also have to parse the logs and create indexes. Those indexes can be very expensive in terms of space. Therefore, if they charge you by this space, you can end up paying a significant amount of money. It can be more than what you expect to pay. I like the fact that LogPoint has a fixed cost. I know what I'm going to pay on a yearly basis. I pay that, and I pay the maintenance, and I just make it work."
"It was on a yearly basis at about $100K. It was not a huge environment. We were running it on our own virtual server environment, which, of course, had a cost. There was hardware and some energy cost, and then there were Microsoft Windows licenses for servers. That's all, but there was nothing in comparison to the licensing costs."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I would rate LogPoint's pricing a seven. It is not very expensive compared to some of the more costly products, and it is not very cheap compared to some of the cheaper products in the SIEM market."
"Logpoint's pricing is mid-ranged and depends on the number of devices."
"For a hundred user deployment the cost is about $10,000. The next year it would be the same because it's a subscription-based license. There are separate costs as well, for example, if a customer asks for training for their staff."
"Our licensing fees are about $10,000 USD per month, which I think is fair."
"LogPoint seemed like it was a good product, but it was expensive and there wasn't any room to move the pricing when customers needed a lower-costing solution."
"It's less expensive than the competitors. The Logpoint marketing team is very accommodating and client-friendly. They offer very good reductions in price. They are pretty good in this aspect. They are transparent in their licensing and pricing."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
20%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise5
 

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 LogPoint?
I rate the pricing at eight, suggesting it's relatively good or affordable.
What needs improvement with LogPoint?
I selected Logpoint for the pricing as it is reasonable. I am located in Bangladesh, South Asia, Dhaka. I have tried ...
What is your primary use case for LogPoint?
I had experience with Logpoint before, and I contacted the Exabeam solution, but there was no response; they did not ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zscaler Client Connector?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing is fair, though it is a bit costly. It oper...
What needs improvement with Zscaler Client Connector?
For Zscaler Client Connector, I would appreciate more granular control over the client update rollout and slightly fa...
What is your primary use case for Zscaler Client Connector?
My main use case of Zscaler Client Connector is to provide secure, seamless access to the internet and internal appli...
 

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
AP Pension, Copenhagen Airports, KMD, Terma, DISA, Danish Crown, Durham City Council, Game, TopDanmark, Lahti Energia, Energi Midt, Synoptik, Eissmann Group Automotive, Aligro, CG50...
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Logpoint vs. Zscaler Client Connector and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.