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

Stormshield Endpoint Security vs WatchGuard EPDR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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)
Stormshield Endpoint Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
52nd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WatchGuard EPDR
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (22nd)
 

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 Stormshield Endpoint Security is 0.7%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WatchGuard EPDR is 1.5%, down from 2.0% 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%
WatchGuard EPDR1.5%
Stormshield Endpoint Security0.7%
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.
it_user745593 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Project Manager, PMP at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
Protects the global station and has good stability
The feature I find most valuable is that it protects the global station The solution's integration with the Windows environment could be better. The solution needs better integration with products, if it did, it would have the assumption of better security. I've been using the solution since…
Petri Alhainen - PeerSpot reviewer
Administrator at Sulbana Oy
Balanced endpoint protection has improved forensic visibility and speeds threat investigation
I think there's always something that needs to be improved about WatchGuard EPDR, but I don't have something specific to say that you should do this or that. They are listening to the users, so they are fixing things as they've been found. I don't have any example to give. The pricing is always a thing where you need to be in the line that the balance to get it right is a challenging thing with WatchGuard EPDR. If you have good features, then you can have a little bigger price, but if you just get the balance right, that's important. I haven't used automated incident response in WatchGuard EPDR.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Based on my experience, I would recommend Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to other people."
"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service."
"The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward."
"It can automatically correlate events and logs, which is very helpful for an IT administrator. It can correlate different kinds of malware activities over a network, agent, or host system. You do not need to do it manually. It is a good feature. It is also a user-friendly solution. We have deployed it on the cloud because our space does not provide any flexibility for on-premises deployment, but Palo Alto has added some flexibility to install it on-premises. It must be like the same Cortex XDR agent for all the VPN services, web filtering services, and everything else."
"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."
"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."
"It is very good for preventing cryptolocker attacks."
"The feature I find most valuable is that it protects the global station."
"If you need a Windows based multi-functional end-point security solution then this product is for you."
"What I appreciate the most about WatchGuard EPDR is that with the managed detection and response system, when there is an alert about the product running, the turnaround time for enabling it is less than two hours."
"The most valuable feature of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is we don't have to have dedicated infrastructure on-premise because it is cloud-based."
"The protection from malware is the most important feature. It has some endpoint information about the vehicle of the virus, malware, etc. It is also stable and easy to install, and they also provide good technical support."
"Technical support has always been top-notch when you can get through."
"What is really great about Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is its console in the cloud, and it can keep the inventory of software in the PC."
"The dashboard management feature is valuable."
"The feature I find most valuable is the advance search engine."
"The solution protects our equipment and it works quietly in the background, so as not to disrupt employees."
 

Cons

"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."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"I think sometimes Cortex XDR agent automatically stops event capturing from the device, and then even the dashboard does not get any notifications from the agent."
"In general, the price could be more competitive."
"Being able to filter the events to see those that are related to the actual alert would save time spent by the engineer."
"Product might have some bugs."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"Release speed for newer versions. When a new OS is released, you've got to wait half year to get the new version that covers the new Windows OS."
"The solution's integration with the Windows environment could be better."
"Only Windows based. Dependence on MS updates and service start-up priority."
"I'd like them to offer a better way to scan the hardware to detect whether they are valid."
"It needs some improvements in the DNS security feature. Currently, it does not have full DNS security. It only has semi-DNS security, which can be improved. It is an important feature for us, and it would be really good if they can improve the DNS security feature. Our group has some plans to change to Cisco AMP, which has features such as DNS, Umbrella. We are trying to learn about Cisco AMP and compare it with Panda."
"Occasionally, we suffer from little bugs that give us the wrong message."
"The software has performance issues due to its requirements on the processor, however, these issues are common with other vendors, not just WatchGuard."
"Either conclusion means we will have either false positives or false negatives."
"The stability could be improved. My teammates who use Panda Security and I have experienced some issues."
"I would like to see better data protection, for instance using fingerprints to log in."
"They could have more reports."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
Information not available
"I don't think Panda's license is too expensive, but they're charging more than it's worth. It's a yearly license. For 1,000 endpoints, it's around $18,000."
"The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing."
"There is a license needed to use this solution and it is approximately $30 annually."
"Panda is cloud-only and comes at a reasonable cost. It is a set price per seat."
"Our licensing fee is 1M Euro per month, so it is about 80 Euro's per user."
"The solution's pricing is better compared to other products."
"The product is available at a high price."
"Customers need to pay monthly licensing costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense, which is not expensive."
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
18%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise2
 

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,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with WatchGuard EPDR?
I think there's always something that needs to be improved about WatchGuard EPDR, but I don't have something specific...
What is your primary use case for WatchGuard EPDR?
I'm talking about WatchGuard EPDR, which is endpoint protection. I try to remember if we have them in our system, and...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
SkyRecon Systems StormShield Security Suite
Panda Adaptive Defense 360
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Arkoon, Netasq
Indra, Valea AB, Fineit, Aemcom, Data Solutions INC., Gloucestershire NHS, Golden Star Resources Ltd, Hispania Racing Team, Instituto Dos Museus e da ConserÊo, Escuelas Pias Provincia Emaus, Axiom Housing Association, Municipality of Bjuv, Lesedi Nuclear, Mullsj_ municipality, Eng. skolan Norr AB, Dalakraft AB, Peter Green Haulage Ltd
Find out what your peers are saying about Stormshield Endpoint Security vs. WatchGuard EPDR and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.