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

Malwarebytes Teams vs Symantec Endpoint Security Complete comparison

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 Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (6th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Malwarebytes Teams
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
26th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Symantec Endpoint Security ...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
34th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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 Malwarebytes Teams is 1.7%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Endpoint Security Complete is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.7%
Malwarebytes Teams1.7%
Symantec Endpoint Security Complete0.7%
Other93.9%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

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.
reviewer2594097 - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Executive Officer at a wholesaler/distributor with 11-50 employees
Exceptional malware protection with regular updates and behavior-based detection
There are no built-in backups or integrated backup options, which could be an opportunity. The free version is effective, however, the paid version is pricey compared to it. Other customers have mentioned issues with false positives. It lacks enterprise-level management and more enterprise functionality. CrowdStrike and SentinelOne are much more enterprise-grade solutions. Malwarebytes has limited integration with cybersecurity tools and lacks enterprise integrations because it is not an enterprise product.
PetriRajama - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead of IT at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Has provided strong security foundations but struggles with integration and ongoing compatibility issues
It had its problems. They were rebuilding it while having the old functionality and new functionality layered on top of each other. They were migrating the functionalities to the new solution, which caused significant problems. The mobile device management was not unified with the other endpoint management, creating structural issues.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have found the solution to be very easy in respect of the integration and configurable."
"The tool's use cases are relevant to security."
"I recognize that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is one of the best products in its category regarding capabilities."
"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."
"We have found in our test Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to be a very good tool."
"Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices."
"There has been a significant reduction of approximately 70% to 80% in our internal MTTR and MTTD metrics, now around five to eight minutes whereas previously it was hours, which has helped tremendously."
"Palo Alto is the core of the security infrastructure in the environment."
"We have seen a decrease of approximately ninety percent in the number of events."
"It is a stable solution."
"It comprehensively finds and removes malicious software."
"It is intuitive and easy to use, and for the most part, it does a good job of catching things and is good at stopping stuff."
"From our experience, it provides 100% visibility and detects hundreds of infections."
"The most valuable features of the solution are malware scanning and malware removal."
"I like the solution's ability to detect potentially unwanted programs. For some reason, it seems superior to other solutions, or at least in comparison to McAfee."
"The product provides notifications for suspicious events. We have several public access points. The product helps to prevent unauthorized entry. Its most valuable features are pre-installation procedures and a cloud console. The console's interface is simple and can be viewed easily to take action. It covers everything in terms of security threats."
"The SONAR feature is valuable as it offers real-time protection and threat rejection."
"The feature I like the most is the Adaptive Protection... And it does not negatively affect users' activities because we can adapt it and allow binaries that are executed regularly, while forbidding those that are not executed within the company."
"The tool's performance is good. It provides efficient updates quickly, even before threats are encountered in our environment. We've been using this solution for the last fifteen years and have found it very good. It helps to prevent ransomware attacks. We are already using its antivirus and firewall solutions. It has asset management and XDR features."
"In reference to zero-day attacks, we immediately get signatures from the Symantec site. That is good."
"One of the most valuable features includes elements such as host libraries."
"The most valuable features of Symantec Endpoint Security Complete for me are sandboxing and its threat-hunting capabilities."
"With this solution, we haven't had any attacks, every malicious activity is blocked and monitored, and we can integrate it with our SIEM to efficiently manage and monitor all activity."
"The solution prevents any damage from viruses and provides risk mitigation for virus threats."
 

Cons

"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"Cortex XDR should have a lightweight agent, and the agent size should not be heavy."
"For working with the solution, you only really need a web browser, however, we've found that working on Chrome, for example, is horrible."
"In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations."
"Being able to filter the events to see those that are related to the actual alert would save time spent by the engineer."
"A potential area of improvement for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the cost."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"There is also no recovery feature; if some endpoint is under attack there must be the possibility of recovering it or restoring it to a normal state."
"Malwarebytes can improve its network database. Malwarebytes can scan the files and registry. It can scan the system with a light agent. It will not impact the performance of your PC. You can do the full scan and database scan using the EDR, and the RAM and CPU consumption will not increase."
"The online reporting needs to be improved. Currently, we have to look at it online, and if we want to download a report, it just downloads as an Excel file. It's just raw information. There needs to be some way to better display it when it's downloaded."
"If they want to compete with bigger players, they should consider adding items like threat detection and website warnings."
"The product update capability needs to be improved."
"The reporting is not as flexible as you would find with other antivirus software."
"Requires increased efficiency in terms of detecting false positives."
"There are no built-in backups or integrated backup options, which could be an opportunity."
"We had a little performance problem with the solution, but that's been resolved. Since then, it's been running well."
"Any traffic coming through should be recognized whether it is a legitimate URL or not."
"The product isn't stable at all. New issues and bugs are introduced with new releases, which has been happening for the past three years."
"I would like to see improvements to URL filtering, URL filtering IPS, and any URL."
"The Threat Defense for Active Directory feature has a problem in that it is not possible to deploy it within a hybrid management architecture... we would have to migrate all the infrastructure to be managed by the cloud to deploy this feature, so we have not deployed it."
"An area for improvement in Symantec Endpoint Security Complete is that it needs to be developed more because competitors have started providing EDR and XDR functionalities, but in the product, those are still missing. Another area for improvement in Symantec Endpoint Security Complete is that it needs to be lightweight. Currently, the product is very heavy when compared to other vendors. It takes up too much space on the hard drive and the memory."
"Enhancements in malware analysis and behavior detection would be beneficial."
"Symantec Endpoint Security Complete does not cover everything on the cloud. It does not cover the workstation emails. There are risks associated with it."
"Getting ROI from Symantec Endpoint Security Complete is tough. It's not feasible to get ROI now."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"I am using the Community edition."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"It is expensive."
"It is really expensive. We've got between 30 and 40 licenses every year, and for the number of licenses that we have, we're finding that Malwarebytes on average costs between $900 and $1,000 more per year than comparable options. We're paying about $3,300 per year for these licenses. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee."
"Malwarebytes is a cost-effective product."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price and ten is a high price, I rate the product's pricing a seven."
"The platform pricing is competitive with other antivirus products."
"Its cost is around $60 a machine. The cost of the total solution for 250 people is about $8,500 a year. If we add EDR to it, it will bring that cost up to about $15,000. The cost for Carbon Black is about $25,000, which is $10,000 more, but you get all AI functions with it."
"I would say that it's affordable. It costs much less than Sentinel One, CrowdStrike, or anything of that nature. But, at the same time, you are getting what you pay for. So I would say it's one of the best when you're comparing traditional NextGen AVs like Webroot that aren't the best in the bunch."
"Its licensing is annual. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee."
"License renewal is not a straightforward process. I have a three-year subscription. It takes a long time to renew the license after three years. It is not proactive on that. The solution is expensive for the coverage that it does. I have to include other products to complement the protection that Symantec Endpoint Security Complete does not cover. We have to pay 18 euros. There are no additional support or maintenance costs."
"I'm recommending going with three-year licensing, rather than the yearly licensing option for this product."
"The product's pricing is dependent on partnership levels. The solution's price is competitive compared to other solutions."
"In terms of costs, Symantec Endpoint Security Complete has become costlier compared to how much it was in the past. The cost of the product is very high now. The customer needs to pay extra for additional features, but not for technical support. For example, if you need an email gateway or if you are looking for URL filtering, you have to pay extra, and that's where the costs for Symantec Endpoint Security Complete become higher."
"The pricing is good. It's good value for the money."
"Symantec Endpoint Security Complete is not expensive."
"It's cost-effective and well-suited for smaller to midrange companies."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise52
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise7
 

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 Malwarebytes?
I really hate the automatic rebilling without officially confirming it with me. It's an annoyance and they should at ...
What needs improvement with Malwarebytes?
It takes up too much space when it's trying to run in the background.
What is your primary use case for Malwarebytes?
My primary use case is that it's protecting me against malware.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Endpoint Security Complete?
Symantec Endpoint Security Full/Complete license is not expensive and advise using the full feature.
What needs improvement with Symantec Endpoint Security Complete?
It had its problems. They were rebuilding it while having the old functionality and new functionality layered on top ...
What is your primary use case for Symantec Endpoint Security Complete?
It's the network side of things. They have the Fortinet SASE network protection, which is ideal for us because most o...
 

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
Knutson Construction
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Malwarebytes Teams vs. Symantec Endpoint Security Complete and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.