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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs ESET Inspect comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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 Detection and Response (EDR)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
120
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
36th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (35th)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
51st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.2%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 0.9%, down from 1.3% 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 Networks3.7%
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response1.2%
ESET Inspect0.9%
Other94.2%
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.
reviewer2642739 - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Delivery Analyst at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
User-friendly platform and dashboards provide comprehensive insights
I would like to see improvements on the operational side, specifically in grouping. Currently, I can group sensors into a custom group and assign policies, but I feel it is a shame that I cannot create groups of groups with inheritance. This would be useful for organizing multiple sites or countries into a single group containing multiple sub-groups. Additionally, in the whitelisting case, if I want one policy to have specific whitelisting, but not all the machines in that policy to have it, I could use multiple groups belonging to the same parent group. It is a bit disappointing that whitelisting can only be done via policies and not for individual machines. If I need to whitelist for only one machine, I must create a specific policy. This poses a challenge with two thousand endpoints, making it nearly impossible to create two thousand different policies.
Cees Van Den Haak - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Manager at Bouwbedrijf de Vries en Verburg BV
A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that you can manage and react to vulnerabilities and attacks on all the workstations or laptops. You can put certain workstations and isolation. With ESET PROTECT, you see only one machine that is protected, but with ESET Inspect, you see all the machines that are protected in an environment.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The interface is easy to use and it is more up to date than our previous solution."
"The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical."
"We use it for malicious connections from malicious websites, to identify payloads that might be inside the traffic, to identify malicious processes or bugs that are running on the network, and any activities that tend to lead to data infiltration."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has helped lighten the load of our security analysts because it was the major tool that we were using and the one we utilized most."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"The initial setup isn't too bad."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"It has reduced the amount of time that we spend responding to threats by at least 50%."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform. It is very straightforward."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"If a file was infected on somebody's laptop or workstation, then it is now easier for us to understand what the impact is on the environment, as the Cybereason product enables me to go directly into the software, look up the process, see who were the dealers, what were the websites, what were the IP addresses which were contacted, and detect if there were other systems which were impacted or if my environment was compromised."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
 

Cons

"It tends to do 99.9% of things. The only thing I'd like is single sign-on authentication into their cloud platform so that my users can be properly authenticated against it."
"The main issue I could point out is the offline agents and the way that it is missing."
"If they had pulse rate detection, it would be better."
"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."
"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."
"It is not easy to sell Cortex XDR, not because it isn't a good tool. Its marketing needs to be improved."
"Managing the product should be easier."
"Every 30 or 40 days, there's a new version and we need to go and make sure our customer's laptops are upgraded."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"Cybereason is not flexible in terms of needing a lot of servers, or assets."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"The graphics are a little lacking."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"There can be problems with the Electronic Data Interchange (EDI). The reporting feature needs improvement."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"The platform's price could be better."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
 

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."
"This is an expensive solution."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"I am using the Community edition."
"I feel it is fairly priced."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"The price was fine."
"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."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"The pricing is manageable."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business48
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise56
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
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,...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
My main use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is mostly for incident response.
What needs improvement with Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
When it comes to advanced threats, it sometimes helps me with finding them and hunting them down with threat detectio...
What advice do you have for others considering Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR compone...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
ESET Enterprise Inspector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. ESET Inspect and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.