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

ESET Inspect vs Kaspersky Next XDR Expert comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 9, 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)
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
Kaspersky Next XDR Expert
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
35th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (38th)
 

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 ESET Inspect is 0.9%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Next XDR Expert is 1.1%, 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 Networks3.7%
Kaspersky Next XDR Expert1.1%
ESET Inspect0.9%
Other94.3%
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.
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.
Manikumar David - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at R K Khanna and Associates
Experienced weak security checks and increased system load with limited control
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is not up to the mark compared to what I have seen from earlier products. I was using CrowdStrike, and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is not up to the mark compared to CrowdStrike and other products. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response sometimes seems to allow certain files which should not be allowed on its own. I trust Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response to check the files, but I cannot sit and check all the files that are coming in. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response has its own weaknesses. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response slows the system slightly. It uses more resources than what CrowdStrike does. When any attack happens or something is happening with other products I am using, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response stops certain things. However, it does not take me to the file, and it is not user-friendly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"From a single pane of glass, you can easily manage all of your endpoints."
"We have found in our test Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to be a very good tool."
"The main benefit of using Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks while employing Palo Alto Firewall at the internet edge is that it improves security on our endpoint devices, integrating seamlessly with Palo Alto Firewalls to deliver comprehensive network, analyst, and security details all in a single dashboard, which allows us to manage everything from our network devices."
"Cortex is the best tool for endpoint detection, and I have used it to verify hashes or domains to identify malicious activity, trigger playbooks that automate and gather endpoint logs, block malicious processes, and update incident tickets, showcasing end-to-end processes with automation in investigation and reducing the analysis workflow."
"It blocks malicious files, prevents attacks, and doesn't require many updates because it is a very light application."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription."
"I've found the solution to be highly scalable for enterprises."
"The solution helps find bugs, and it is safe to use to prevent attacks by hackers."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"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."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"The advanced detection features are valuable."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"One of the most valuable aspects of Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions is their ability to detect and respond to spam and viruses in their early stages."
"It downloads essential security patches that are valuable for my PC."
"Kaspersky offers more visible and comprehensive features compared to other products."
"I do customize the policies to determine what to do and what not to do."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is its consolidated features."
"From my point of view, one of the best aspects of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is its high detection rate, which surpasses many other solutions. Its valuable features include behavior detection, threat prevention, device control, adaptive anomaly control, and centralized protection detection."
 

Cons

"In some cases, there are too many options for me, and it is a bit too hard to find some settings which I really need to implement."
"Managing the product should be easier."
"However, if you do not have Palo Alto in your environment, you are paying these additional services just for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, so it is not a cost-effective solution."
"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."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"It is not a suitable solution if you are looking for a single product with multiple features such as DLP, encryption, rollback, etc."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The main issue was compatibility with the cloud itself. The CPU usage immediately spiked, causing the machines to hang and sometimes even forcing server or computer restarts."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is expensive. It should improve its stability."
"Incorporating an AI protection tool with the capability to detect and prevent zero-day threats, particularly those with a five-star rating in terms of severity would be beneficial."
"There are certain shortcomings with the UI of the solution. The UI is not at all user-friendly."
"The solution must provide better security."
"There is room for improvement in the support."
"I think it's just a normal tool; compared to other market EDRs, this is a very poor product."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response needs vast resources on the central node. Not all maintenance tasks are in the GUI, so we often use commands. The lack of documentation for these processes means we frequently reach out to support, open tickets, and run complex CLI commands. It's not the most straightforward process. It should also improve stability."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."
"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."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The price was fine."
"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."
"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 is "expensive" and flexible."
"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."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"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."
"It is cost-effective in terms of services and features compared to other more expensive EDR solutions like CrowdStrike and Trend Micro."
"The tool's pricing was high during the last renewal."
"I would say that their pricing is generally competitive and attractive."
"The solution is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"Yearly payments are to be made toward the licensing costs of the solution."
"The pricing falls within the average range."
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%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
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
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
 

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 Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is not up to the mark compared to what I have seen from earlier products. I...
What advice do you have for others considering Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
It seems okay. CrowdStrike was not heavy on my network or usage. I would rate this product an 8.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. Kaspersky Next XDR Expert and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.