We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,382 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source.""The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems.""The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration.""The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great.""It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it.""The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.""The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features.""One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros »

"One of the most valuable features is the Threat Emulation and Threat Extraction. These features are able to scan email attachments before the user is able to access the file and then provide a safe copy of the attachment. Malicious files never get to the users machine. This is a very valuable feature of this solution.""It has a great ability to detect threats and keep us safe.""Check Point Harmony Endpoint can be easily deployed and is cost effective and more secure.""The initial setup is very easy.""In terms of network usage, it actually reduced the amount of malicious attacks that we had. Before, we really didn't have a secure network. Each endpoint had to protect itself and probably most of them were not actually protected. Now, it's an entire process in which we've been able to cut down significantly the amount of malicious attacks by 60 percent that we get in the organization. It helps us to adequately monitor what has been going on with our network traffic and stopping individual attacks from accessing certain sites where we want to have restrictions or limitations.""One of the coolest features is that it provides an HTML report on the laptop and the endpoint console for the administrator.""Harmony's endpoint sandboxing is really good.""It's great for securing our endpoints from any external attacks."

More Check Point Harmony Endpoint Pros »

"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that.""It is easy to use.""Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management.""The initial setup is pretty easy.""The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting.""The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing.""The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward.""Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pros »

Cons
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on.""I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics.""We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment.""We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints.""We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way.""Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that.""The GUI needs improvement, it's not good.""In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons »

"We cannot integrate this product with other solutions, which is something that should be improved.""Support's service and the response times can be improved. The triaging of the tickets takes a long time and the tickets are only resolved with escalations.""They could be focused on the analysis of USB devices.""The only thing that our customers want, is lower prices.""As I understand there will be a URL filtering feature included with the browser agent in the future. This will allow URL filtering without the need for a Gateway Device. This is something I am looking forward to and would be a great addition to list of features.""Tech Support must be better.""It needs more documentation and better ease of deployment. For documentation, it needs more information about integrating the endpoints on SandBlast Agent mobile as well as on desktop platforms.""Endpoint vulnerability management is one of the modules I believe is missing and it is something that is required."

More Check Point Harmony Endpoint Cons »

"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.""It should support more mobile operating systems. That is one of the cons of their infrastructure right now.""Impact on system performance is horrible, adding a lot of delays for users.""It'll help if customization was easier.""I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response).""It would be good to have a better way to search for a file within the UI.""The solution can never really be an on-premises solution based simply on the way it is set up. It needs metadata to run and improve. Having an on-premises solution would cut it off from making improvements.""In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection.""In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement.""The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing.""Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.""There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization.""The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost.""We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work.""We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice »

"There are three different licensing models including basic, advanced, and complete, and it needs to be selected according to the endpoint.""In terms of licensing, have a buffer zone around your projects in terms of the amount of endpoints that you want to have. You can always have more, but it is best to leave room for a little increase or growth.""Licensing comes free in that first year or is included in the base package. From a commercial point of view, it really just is the renewal cost, rather than a one-time fixed cost or buy-in.""Initial monies replacing all AVs with a single product is about £10k.""The cost is huge compared to other products that are available on market.""The licensing cost for Check Point is $3 USD or $4 USD per end-user.""The solution is too pricey.""The price is good."

More Check Point Harmony Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice »

"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive.""Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider.""This is an expensive solution.""It has a yearly renewal.""If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them.""It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis.""Our customers have expressed that the price is high.""The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
554,382 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.
Top Answer: Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.
Top Answer: The GUI needs improvement, it's not good. There are false positives in emails. At times, the emails are blocked and… more »
Top Answer: Harmony's endpoint sandboxing is really good.
Top Answer: Check Point Harmony is definitely pricier compared to other endpoints.
Top Answer: The solution is mostly very good. The reason why I'm trying to compare it with FireEye is due to the fact that it's… more »
Top Answer: Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks.… more »
Top Answer: Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions… more »
Top Answer: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface… more »
Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Check Point Endpoint Security, Endpoint Security, Check Point SandBlast Agent
Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Learn More
Overview

Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.

Check Point Harmony is the industry’s first unified security solution for users, devices and access.

The solution protects devices and internet connections from the most sophisticated attacks while ensuring Zero-Trust Access to corporate applications.

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the world's first detection and response app that natively integrates network, endpoint and cloud data to stop sophisticated attacks. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks accurately detects threats with behavioral analytics and reveals the root cause to speed up investigations.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
Learn more about Check Point Harmony Endpoint
Learn more about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
Sample Customers
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Boston Properties, Independence Care System, Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre (MCEC), Courtagen Life Sciences, Carmel Partners
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company19%
Government13%
Manufacturing Company13%
Comms Service Provider6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider24%
Computer Software Company23%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm22%
Comms Service Provider19%
Healthcare Company13%
Manufacturing Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider33%
Computer Software Company26%
Insurance Company4%
Government4%
REVIEWERS
Consumer Goods Company13%
Computer Software Company13%
Financial Services Firm13%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company24%
Comms Service Provider22%
Government7%
Energy/Utilities Company4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise46%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise51%
REVIEWERS
Small Business35%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise52%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business9%
Midsize Enterprise51%
Large Enterprise40%
REVIEWERS
Small Business44%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise36%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise49%
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,382 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 30 reviews while Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 6th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 29 reviews. Check Point Harmony Endpoint is rated 9.2, while Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Endpoint writes "Enables us to integrate endpoints into our IPS and we are seeing things which, without this tool, we would be exposed to". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Has a centralized console and does predictive analysis of malware". Check Point Harmony Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Carbon Black CB Defense, whereas Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security and ESET Endpoint Security. See our Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks report.

See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.

We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.