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
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Malwarebytes Teams
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
25th
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)
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Malwarebytes Teams is 1.6%, down from 2.0% 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 Networks3.9%
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform1.3%
Malwarebytes Teams1.6%
Other93.2%
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

"My advice for others looking into using Cortex is that it is very easy to use and very useful for the customer environment, whether it's a public or private one."
"Cortex XDR is a simple platform that's easy for administrators and users. You have a lot of flexibility to change or customize the features."
"Automation and playbooks have helped me significantly, as Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, efficiently detecting and blocking malicious attacks with firewalls while eliminating workload and speeding responses for next-generation operations."
"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is its machine-learning capabilities. Additionally, there is full integration with other solutions."
"WildFire AI is the best option for this product."
"Cortex is the best solution for avoiding security breaches, malware attacks, and other kinds of security issues."
"Cortex XDR alerts us on the dashboard when there's a threat, which allows us to restrict that user and helps secure our infrastructure."
"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."
"For a company with about 100 or more PC units, the solution is quite effective, makes monitoring easy, offers a lot of reporting, and provides protection for many applications including Windows and Zoom."
"Ten times a day, improved signatures will be downloaded, so it is very up-to-date in terms of malware experience."
"The product keeps our company safe."
"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."
"Considering the overall management of the system and seeing what is being protected, it is doing a great job."
"I commonly recommend Malwarebytes to people due to the fact that I find it quite reliable."
"When it comes to frontend protections, it has some of the best definitions. In addition, they do traditional signature and heuristic detection a lot better than Microsoft and some other players in that space."
"It prevents us from having to re-image computers if they are found to be harboring malware."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"The application control is highly valued by me."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped us protect our environments and have more meaningful requests for access as well as meaningful logging for response."
"The biggest one that we focus on is the application control with ringfencing. That combination is very beneficial."
"The biggest positive impact ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has had on my organization is improved security."
"The time saved from dealing with ransomware nonsense is invaluable."
"ThreatLocker's most valuable feature is its scanning capability, which executes all types of executable files."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company and my clients' companies save on operational costs and expenses, and I would estimate we have saved at least thirty to forty percent."
 

Cons

"The technical support is not very good. I find the process difficult."
"One thing that was missing was the integration part. Currently, they don't have out-of-box integration with IBM QRadar, or if they have the integration, the integration doesn't work well."
"To jump from the partner to Palo Alto directly was challenging."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"The solution lacks real-time, on-demand antivirus."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response). Then it would work well with SIEM Response."
"The negative aspect I see is the economic model used by Palo Alto."
"I would like to see improvement in the tool's user interface, particularly in the area of managing alerts and providing more reporting capabilities."
"We experience a lot of false positives."
"There's no indication on the system as to when the software is doing a scan."
"There hasn't been an ROI because we haven't had an event that would cause this software to do something. Therefore, at this point, it has just been a cost to us because we haven't gotten anything out of it."
"The product is a little bit more expensive than the other brands."
"The product update capability needs to be improved."
"Malwarebytes is too simplistic. From a SOC IR perspective, it doesn't give you very much data around it. It doesn't tie things or provide SHA-1 and SHA-256 detection information, which makes it hard to do an additional investigation."
"We had a little performance problem with the solution, but that's been resolved. Since then, it's been running well."
"A solution must be installed in the main gateway to give an overview of the incoming and outgoing traffic. The technical support team's response time should be faster."
"I cannot suggest anything that they are not already doing. They should keep adding features as they have been."
"While ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is a strong zero trust platform, especially for application allowance and least privileges, areas for improvement include policy management, reporting dashboards, user experience, and notifications."
"The portal can be a little overwhelming at times from an administration point of view. It displays a lot of information, and it's all useful. However, sometimes there is too much on the screen to sift through, especially if you're trying to diagnose a client's problem with a piece of software. Maybe something has stopped working since they updated it, and we need to see if ThreatLocker is blocking a component of that software."
"ThreatLocker could offer more flexible training, like online or offline classes after hours. The fact that they even provide weekly training makes it seem silly to suggest, but some people can't do it during the day, so they want to train after work. They could also start a podcast about issues they see frequently and what requires attention. A podcast would be helpful to keep us all apprised about what's going on and/or offline training for those people who can't train during the week."
"The snapshots used in the ThreatLocker University portal are outdated snippets and have not been updated in conjunction with the portal itself."
"From one to ten, I would rate the solution overall as a nine out of ten just because the initial setup was a little confusing."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform could be improved by addressing the human identity piece, whether through ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform or another tool."
"In my opinion, it is a love-hate relationship with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform; everybody hates it because it causes so much need for user input to request to allow applications, but it is a necessary evil because security is paramount and it is the most important feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 feel it is fairly priced."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"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."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."
"It is expensive."
"The licensing is per seat, with clients being a little less expensive than servers. If we need more licenses, we can accomplish that within a day. As Malwarebytes adds new features to their product, such as DNS filtering and a patching module, they want to charge us more even though we're a premium user, which isn't ideal."
"Yearly, it is around $50 per client."
"I believe the retail price is between $40 and $50 per copy."
"The price of Malwarebytes is in the middle range compared to other vendors."
"We expect to pay $1,000 USD a month, depending on the number of users."
"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."
"Its licensing is annual. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"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."
"We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"The pricing is pretty fair, considering other solutions. Licensing-wise, it did not take long."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 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%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

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 Business22
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business56
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise12
 

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 is that it is straightforward, and there are no issues.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
Improvements for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform could include some additional guidance in the beginning of setup. W...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is endpoint protection, a zero trust platform for applications,...
 

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.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.