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

Compare Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Sophos Intercept X

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Sophos Intercept X and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,676 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
"If somebody has been compromised, the question always is: How has it affected other devices in the network? Cisco AMP gives you a very neat view of that.""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 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 solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features.""It is a very stable program.""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.""The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros »

"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.""Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices.""The dashboard is customizable.""Its ability to react to cyber data attacks is awesome. That is pretty much the use of it. What blows your mind is the ability to access your assets remotely and see what is actually going on with them. You can not only see them in a console. You can also react very rapidly to your assets that are compromised.""It is easy to use.""The behavior-based detection feature is valuable.""Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution.""Its interface and pricing are most valuable. It is better than other vendors in terms of security."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pros »

"I have found the most valuable feature to be the EDR.""It is one of the best in terms of technicality.""The deployment is quick. It just depends on the environment and what you may be replacing.""Sophos Intercept X has a host of valuable features, including its anti-malware feature, which we considered key.""The most valuable features are ease of use and the GUI.""Anti-virus captures malicious threats and an aggressive next generation firewall.""Malware protection and application blocking are absolutely great. The DLP and malware features are very helpful. It is also very user-friendly, reliable, and scalable. It is easy to set up. We are also happy with its price and support.""Technical support is responsive and adept."

More Sophos Intercept X Pros »

Cons
"The technical support is very slow.""...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal.""The GUI needs improvement, it's not good.""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 room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications.""I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products.""The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time.""The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons »

"It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do. The price could be better. It would also help if they had a team for deployment and support.""In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution.""I would like to see some additional features related to email protection included.""I would like to see better protection, specifically to protect email applications.""There are a large number of false positives.""Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms.""The connection to the internet has not performed as expected.""A little bit more automation would be nice."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Cons »

"The after sales service and support could be improved.""The Data Loss Prevention module can be better. It should also have threat hunting capabilities.""They don't have the full stack of offerings as compared to the other competitive products that we see.""When there is an event generated by either the firewall or Intercept X, and the originating IP address is the same, these should be merged into a single event rather than two.""There is some issue with the reporting and refreshing information on resources that have been eliminated.""Integration with firewall solutions could be better.""Better protection in the endpoint, server, and mobile is needed.""Intercept X needs more reporting and device management features, so I can get messages from PCs that let me know if I need to do something with them."

More Sophos Intercept X Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"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.""Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc.""Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.""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.""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.""The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable.""There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it.""In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there.""It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis.""If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them.""The price of the solution is high for the license and in general.""Our customers have expressed that the price is high.""In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage.""This is an expensive solution.""Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."

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

"The price of this product should be reduced because it is a little high.""The price of this solution is a little high compared to competitors because they do not have a proper pricing structure.""We are happy with the pricing across all Sophos products.""You can purchase a license for one to three years.""I find the pricing to be a little bit expensive, although it is acceptable, for now.""When you start going to the EDR technologies and the MTR, it is a little bit expensive. It's a very good technology, and obviously, you're going to pay for it, but the pricing could do a little bit of work.""Intercept X for endpoints is around $35 per user per year. The server version is $95 per server per year.""You can pay monthly, but most of our customers choose annual subscriptions because they are less expensive."

More Sophos Intercept X Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
554,676 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: 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 »
Top Answer: It is one of the best in terms of technicality.
Top Answer: It is an annual subscription, rather than a monthly one. It's paid annually. You can pay monthly, but most of our… more »
Top Answer: If we can lower the price, it will be fantastic because it will generate more revenue for us.
Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Intercept X
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.

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.

Sophos Intercept X stops the widest range of attacks with a unique combination of deep learning malware detection, exploit prevention, anti-ransomware, and more.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
Learn more about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
Learn more about Sophos Intercept X
Sample Customers
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Flexible Systems
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company19%
Government13%
Manufacturing Company13%
Financial Services Firm6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider24%
Computer Software Company23%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm13%
Computer Software Company13%
Consumer Goods Company13%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company24%
Comms Service Provider22%
Government7%
Energy/Utilities Company4%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm15%
Healthcare Company12%
Manufacturing Company12%
Insurance Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider28%
Computer Software Company20%
Government7%
Educational Organization5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise46%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise51%
REVIEWERS
Small Business44%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise36%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise49%
REVIEWERS
Small Business59%
Midsize Enterprise19%
Large Enterprise22%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise31%
Large Enterprise41%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Sophos Intercept X and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 6th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 30 reviews while Sophos Intercept X is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 51 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2, while Sophos Intercept X is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Has a centralized console and does predictive analysis of malware". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Intercept X writes "Great reporting and good training with a pretty straightforward setup". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Sophos Intercept X is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne and Seqrite Endpoint Security. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Sophos Intercept X 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.