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

Stellar Cyber Open XDR vs Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
6.7
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Stellar Cyber Open XDR
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
55th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (42nd), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (29th), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (18th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (25th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (21st), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (34th), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (23rd)
Trellix Endpoint Detection ...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
21st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.6%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Stellar Cyber Open XDR is 1.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is 0.9%, down from 1.2% 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 Networks3.6%
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)0.9%
Stellar Cyber Open XDR1.0%
Other94.5%
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.
JC
Global Director, Commercial Operations at Promasecure LLC
Automated security monitoring increases efficiency, but market visibility needs improvement
I am currently evaluating Stellar Cyber Open XDR in terms of their support. I do not see any major areas for improvement as of now. Their support is good, and the team is small, enabling them to cater to everyone effectively. While I have not encountered significant drawbacks so far, market penetration is challenging due to the product's newness, despite its flexibility and customization features. I find their user interface to be quite good.
Duncan  Kims - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Advanced detection has reduced targeted attacks and builds daily confidence in our defenses
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has a very low false positive rate compared to other products, thus increasing the SOC efficiency in how my team relies on the solution day-to-day.With the best features Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers, ease of SOAR integration helps to automate the IOC distribution, and our security team and management trust the product. Advanced detection capabilities ensure that targeted attacks will be detected and blocked before they arrive at our network. SOAR integration has assisted our security team and management in trusting the product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Since they've done their most recent update, the ease to isolate endpoints is valuable. If we find one where there is a virus on it, we can easily isolate it. We don't even have to contact the user. We don't have to manually take them off the network. We can easily isolate them."
"The stability is pretty good except for one or two cases, and based on the performance, it's been okay with pretty high performance, no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to rapidly detect certain hardware files."
"I recognize that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is one of the best products in its category regarding capabilities."
"The tool is easy to use."
"It is a simple platform to use."
"The normal protection was really effective, and we detected situations that if we didn't have Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it's highly likely that we would have been affected, but it protected the infrastructure."
"Stellar Cyber Open XDR offers these functionalities at a more affordable price, making it easier for me to position it with price-sensitive customers."
"It can integrate with almost any cybersecurity tool available in the market."
"What we're using the most and what we found valuable in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response are Web Control, Advanced Threat Protection, and Threat Prevention features."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) scores highly because of its sheer depth of endpoint visibility, the precision of its behavior-based detection, and the massive time savings we get from its AI-guided investigations."
"The product and the services we have are quite good."
"The product's initial setup phase was very straightforward since you just need to install it, and it works."
"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."
"My advice for others considering Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is to use it, or any other Trellix products, as I believe they are excellent."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is valuable because we have a Wide Area Network with many sites, and the EDR is cross-site since it is installed and managed from the cloud."
 

Cons

"There's an overall lack of features."
"They've been having some issues with updating their endpoint agents, and it has been quite frustrating."
"The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports."
"In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved."
"Dashboards do not allow everyone to see what's happening."
"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"It's more focused on network communication. If a customer wants to increase the level of protection and start working with documents, it's impossible to integrate these features into the system. It's more of a communication-oriented system than a content security-oriented system."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"I would rate the stability at about five to six. The platform requires some fine-tuning, especially when integrating data sources and creating connectors."
"Support is an issue because they have a limited number of resources."
"The solution's downside stems from the fact that Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and McAfee MVISION Endpoint are not combined into a single solution, so from an improvement perspective, they need to be combined into a single solution."
"The searching capabilities for the IOCs can be further improved"
"For Spanish users, it is necessary to have a knowledge base specifically designed for them, which is currently not available."
"I also think performance needs improvement, especially for servers, as the Trellix HX module uses high CPU, scans constantly, and negatively impacts the performance for our clients' users or our servers."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
"The graphical view for nodes must be increased."
"The alert feature of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response needs improvement because for you to get the alerts, you have to log on to the portal. What my company needs is a tool that sends you alerts. For example, if it detects a threat on your machine, it should send you an alert. My company gets the alerts instead from the antivirus software rather than the EDR. If you want to see the alerts on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, you have to connect to the system manually. Another area for improvement in the tool is the reporting. My company needs weekly and monthly reports about the alerts, but you can't extract reports from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, so a decision was made to move to another EDR solution, particularly Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, next month. My company tested Microsoft Defender for Endpoint via a POC for one to three months. The resource usage of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is also an area for improvement because it consumes a lot of memory. For example, during the on-demand scan, you can't work because of the high CPU usage. You need to schedule the scans. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response has a lot of modules, but my company doesn't use all modules."
"One area where Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) can be improved is the lack of device or user mapping."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
"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."
"It’s a single license platform."
"The price is reasonable."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is reasonable in terms of cost. It's a tool my company has been using for a few years now. It costs $25,000 to $30,000 for six hundred users."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is high, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"The product’s pricing is reasonable."
"Speaking about the price, you must use the product to find the product's cost for you."
"The licensing costs attached to the solution are very easy to manage. There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs."
"Pricing for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is not that expensive, but it's not something that a startup could buy. Pricing for it is for midsized businesses. There's an additional payment if you want data retention for more than thirty days. They gave us data retention for thirty days. Then if you want longer data retention, they have the paid option for a three-month data retention period and for a one-year data retention period."
"The pricing is always high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise55
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise14
 

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 Stellar Cyber Open XDR?
Pricing is a major benefit of Stellar Cyber Open XDR. I rate it between three and four on the cost scale. It offers f...
What needs improvement with Stellar Cyber Open XDR?
I am currently evaluating Stellar Cyber Open XDR in terms of their support. I do not see any major areas for improvem...
What is your primary use case for Stellar Cyber Open XDR?
I use Stellar Cyber Open XDR ( /products/stellar-cyber-open-xdr-reviews ) as a 24/7 security monitoring tool, especia...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
My experience with pricing, implementation costs and platform licensing has been positive. The solution offers a robu...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
Although Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers those detection, investigation and response capabilitie...
What is your primary use case for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
The main use case for Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) in my organization is for continuous monitoring o...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
McAfee MVISION EDR, MVISION EDR, MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Sumitomo Chemical USA, PlastiPak Packaging, University of Denver, Large California State Agency, Large Midwestern American City
Sutherland Global Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Stellar Cyber Open XDR vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.