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

Malwarebytes Teams vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 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
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
6th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (4th), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

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 ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.3%, up from 0.8% 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%
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform1.3%
Malwarebytes Teams1.7%
Other93.3%
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.
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks saves time in various ways, although the user interface is fairly standard."
"The initial setup isn't too bad."
"The most valuable aspect of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks for me is its integration with AI detection, where we get to know the behavioral detection based on users, traffic patterns, and different services that we consume."
"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 solution's most valuable feature is its ability to rapidly detect certain hardware files."
"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."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management; Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very easy to work with, and we're quite happy with them."
"WildFire AI is the best option for this product."
"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 solution is very good at scanning."
"The installation process is very easy, especially since it is on the cloud."
"I commonly recommend Malwarebytes to people due to the fact that I find it quite reliable."
"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 solution was successfully deployed and so far has been able to stop all ransomware attacks, which has been extremely beneficial to the organization."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that I can use it wherever I want, be it at the office, at home, or even outside."
"It is intuitive and easy to use. For the most part, it does a good job of catching things. It is good at stopping stuff. I did a couple of tests with a password cracker. I tried to load that on, and Malwarebytes didn't let me do that, which was pretty good. It has a rollback feature that I haven't seen with any other company. If one of your endpoints are hit with mass ransomware, you could actually roll it back. I watched a demo of them do that, and it was pretty sweet."
"I think the biggest expense that you can save is an attack from an outsider."
"For companies that are considering ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, my advice would be to go for it, as it truly changes how you secure your clients and offers more opportunities to provide services to clients that were not feasible before."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has definitely saved us on operational costs and expenses by preventing incidents."
"From 1 to 10, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform as a 10; I've been super happy with it, advising other companies to just do it since it's a simple setup, easy to use, intuitive, and worth the money compared to potential losses."
"Blocking is done comprehensively."
"If all of our vendors would act and support us like ThreatLocker does, we would be happy."
"Essentially, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is super easy to use, very informative, and it does everything quickly and easily."
"The customer service and technical support of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are phenomenal, top-notch and top drawer, always willing to help and showing exactly where we need to look to ensure we can have the tools we need for the next time, reducing the need to call into support."
 

Cons

"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"The dashboard could use some significant improvement, just making it more useful with more information. It has a limited amount of information right now. It is customizable, but I'd love to see a better out-of-box dashboard."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses. For example, if users select a license, they think they will have all the platforms they need to improve their network or security. But after some time, Palo Alto Networks changed their licensing, and some of the features that, for example, were free at the beginning now have a cost. I think the integration can be improved. For example, a lot of tools are just integrated through APIs."
"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."
"Enhancing UI simplicity and playbook flexibility are areas that could benefit from more low-code automation options for smoother integrations."
"This product has not improved my organization - in fact, we are in the process of moving back to another product as a result of Cortex's horrible impact on system performance."
"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."
"There's no indication on the system as to when the software is doing a scan."
"The stability and performance of the solution are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"I'd like to see increased efficiency in terms of detecting false positives because we sometimes have cases where detections are repeated despite requests for them to be identified as false positives."
"I would like to see a little more detail in the log. So, when an event occurs, I'd like to know not just when it happened and on what device, but what activity was taking place on the machine at the time so that we can drill down. If we get a false positive, we have to do a lot of research and go back and forth with our end-users to know why it was a false positive. So, having a little more detail around detections and events would probably be my most asked feature."
"Even though we're satisfied with the product, we don't like the bait-and-switch pricing style."
"The free version is effective, however, the paid version is pricey compared to it."
"This solution reports far too many false positives!"
"The reporting is not as flexible as you would find with other antivirus software."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting needs to improve its user interface and overall workflow."
"I believe ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform could be improved with a mobile version, as many clients work off their phones, downloading all kinds of things on their mobile devices."
"Some reporting areas need improvement. We need to generate more reports."
"It is not easy to use. I am still learning."
"ThreatLocker University offers many good training modules, but more in-depth training for advanced platforms would be beneficial."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform should focus more on the application allow listing feature, which shows whether a program has been recognized but not necessarily whether it has been trusted."
"More visibility in the built-ins would be nice."
"Sometimes it does block new things we try to run, but once we get them approved, it works perfectly and successfully blocks the things we want to be hindered."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"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."
"It is present, but when compared to other competitive products, I would say it is not less expensive; however, when all of the other added values are considered, the price is reasonable."
"Very costly product."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"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."
"Yearly, it is around $50 per client."
"Malwarebytes is a cost-effective product."
"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."
"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."
"It is expensive."
"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."
"We expect to pay $1,000 USD a month, depending on the number of users."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"The pricing works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."
"ThreatLocker's pricing seems justifiable."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"I believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
"Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools."
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%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
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 Business53
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise11
 

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 ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is goo...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has been fairly good with not a lot of complaints. If I have to s...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I currently work in the Enterprise GitLab platform for Scania where we have a lot of users using our GitLab platform ...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

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. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.