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

Nyotron PARANOID vs Trellix Endpoint Security Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 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)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Nyotron PARANOID
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
42nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Security P...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
160
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (11th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.5%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nyotron PARANOID is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform is 3.6%, down from 3.9% 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 Networks3.5%
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform3.6%
Nyotron PARANOID0.3%
Other92.6%
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.
Abel Browarnik - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Expertos Browarnik
A cost-effective security solution for endpoint protection
The initial setup is complex. It is rare to see an effective endpoint protection system that does not require some effort. It is neither on the cloud nor on-premises. You deploy it on every endpoint or server, irrespective of perimeter. You must use a deployment tool unless you prefer to do it manually on every endpoint or server. We used an automation tool to deploy it. Since we had MSI with us. We had to verify that everything worked, but it didn't take more than two weeks for 1000 endpoints.
PankajKumar24 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Gigabit Technologies Pvt Ltd
Advanced threat prevention has strengthened incident response and customized security workflows
The biggest advantage of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform is the ATP solution, which provides advanced threat prevention. Machine learning algorithms are available in the product as part of the threat anti-malware, including predictive machine learning and behavioral analysis, which are integral to the anti-malware module of EPP. In terms of my experience with the machine learning algorithms for analysis and threat detection, we are analyzing logs provided by Trellix, but we are not able to conduct specific machine learning analysis on those logs. The automated response mechanisms in the products help with incident management because we have to create playbooks in Trellix console for automation, which we need to enable. The customizable dashboard of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform definitely contributes to the decision-making process, as we customize the dashboard according to customer requirements. When it comes to integration aspects, we are able to integrate Trellix Endpoint Security Platform with SIEM or SOAR solutions using the ePO console, which enhances threat detection capabilities. Reporting and analytics aspects have an impact on security posture assessment, as we are able to fetch reports in the ePO console customized according to customer requirements for downloading and sending via email.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."
"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."
"Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about."
"I like the centralized console and the predictive analysis it does of malware. It is very stable and also scalable."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, collecting relevant indicators such as hashes, IP addresses, or domains efficiently and can detect and block malicious attacks with firewalls."
"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."
"Cortex covers everything I need. It's a perfect solution. Cortex provides a different level of visibility because it's an extended EDR, allowing you to grab logs from the network and firewalls. Palo Alto invented the concept of the extended EDR or XDR."
"First of all, it does the job. It prevents harm to the operating system. Also, the visibility it gives to the user and to the administrator is very good."
"This product really is the best solution for this security issue."
"Nyotron protects your users and does not acquire any threat intelligence."
"The most valuable network security feature is the network sandbox solution. This sandbox feature works on traffic flow."
"We receive good protection with this solution."
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"The technical support services are good."
"Tech support is responsive. They're good, the very best."
"I like trap prevention DNS and threat prevention."
"The detection capability of Trellix Endpoint Security is higher than traditional antivirus solutions."
"The EPO, the ePolicy Orchestrator, is the best endpoint protection central management system."
 

Cons

"The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."
"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"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."
"They are charging for Network Traffic Analyzer (NTA) services, so if the per GB data could be provided at a certain level free of cost or at the same cost which the customer is taking for the entire bundle, that would be better."
"It's not an ideal choice for smaller businesses, as you need a minimum of 200 endpoints to even use the solution at all."
"The solution should be available on Linux and other platforms, including mobile platforms such as Android and iOS."
"The main feature that is missing is to have the same solution on servers."
"The main feature that is missing is to have the same solution on servers. Currently it's only protecting the client side, not the server. If they would add the server in the same solution, that would be great."
"The Linux support is very poor. I use base detection. Currently, they are providing malware protection and logon track features in Windows and Mac. These features aren't available in Linux. It will be helpful to extend these capabilities to Linux. We would also like assets grouping and device lock protection features, which are included in their roadmap."
"McAfee GW Security and McAfee Child Safety need some improvement as they are relatively new."
"We have a lot of problems with the user experience and it's difficult to implement. MacAfee's better than the ancient anti-virus solutions but it's a little slow to resolve. Many files with malware were destroyed through the network, and MacAfee doesn't detect anything."
"Support-wise they need to be better."
"There are a few things I wish the folks at Intel would fix."
"There are times the solution has some additional software added that is not fully integrated properly, such as Exchange Group Sheild. It is quite old and is not fully integrated properly and could be improved."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"They could also increase or improve the scalability because to my knowledge the biggest bandwidth can only support up to 10 gigs of input."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"The price was fine."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"Very costly product."
"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."
"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."
Information not available
"Licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis."
"Customers would need to purchase a license. If a customer purchases an MVISION Endpoint license, he may use that license to install ENS. It's a flexible license where you have the option to either use the McAfee security software or the Windows Defender managed by McAfee, which is MVISION Endpoint."
"The tool is affordable"
"The pricing is more or less the same as the other tools in the market."
"It is not that expensive. There is no additional cost. We got the entire bundle together."
"Trellix may cost around $46 to $47 for a single license without an EDR."
"The solution is not an expensive tool. Compared to other options, it's mostly average-priced. I've deployed it for customers ranging from 100 nodes to over 5,000 nodes. Its renewal prices are very low, and it offers both perpetual and subscription licenses. With a perpetual license, the product will keep working as long as it's not end-of-life, which benefits companies."
"The pricing is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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%
No data available
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise47
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business68
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise62
 

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 do you like most about Nyotron PARANOID?
Nyotron protects your users and does not acquire any threat intelligence.
What needs improvement with Nyotron PARANOID?
There was an initial problem, we had to run the system in detection mode rather than prevention mode. The solution sh...
What is your primary use case for Nyotron PARANOID?
We use Nyotron PARANOID to protect endpoints. It serves as a second and last line of protection. It often detects thr...
How does McAfee Endpoint Security compare with MVISION?
The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deplo...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with FireEye Endpoint Security?
The Crowdstrike Falcon program has a simple to use user interface, making it both an easy to use as well as an effec...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Endpoint Security?
I don't have visibility on pricing because it is negotiated by a different team, as I look after the technical side.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS)
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
El Al Airlines
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Nyotron PARANOID vs. Trellix Endpoint Security Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.