Critical Start vs Palo Alto Networks: MDR Comparison 2026
Critical Start (MDR provider) and Palo Alto Networks (EDR vendor) take different approaches to managed detection and response. Critical Start works with your existing tools, while Palo Alto Networks requires its own security platform. Critical Start targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations; Palo Alto Networks focuses on Mid-market and Enterprise. Critical Start includes 5 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network), compared to 6 for Palo Alto Networks (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS).
Key Differences at a Glance
Winner by Category
Critical Start vs Palo Alto Networks: Which Should You Choose?
Choose Critical Start if:
- •Mid-market to large enterprises wanting technology-agnostic MDR that works with their existing security stack
- •Organizations suffering from alert fatigue wanting TBR's deterministic auto-resolution to reduce noise
- •Companies needing OT/ICS monitoring alongside IT MDR (Claroty, Dragos, Nozomi integrations)
Choose Palo Alto Networks if:
- •US government and defense organizations needing FedRAMP Moderate, DoD IL5, StateRAMP compliance
- •Large enterprises wanting co-managed SOC with full visibility into their Cortex XDR/XSIAM tenant
- •Organizations wanting breach response guarantee (MSIAM 2.0 — 250 hours IR included)
- •You need OT/ICS coverage included in base pricing
- •Breach warranty matters to you (Palo Alto Networks offers one, Critical Start does not)
Bottom line: Palo Alto Networks is the choice if you want a single-vendor stack with deep integration. Critical Start is better if you have existing tools and want flexibility.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main difference between Critical Start and Palo Alto Networks?
Critical Start is a MDR provider that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Palo Alto Networks is an EDR vendor that is platform-native (requires their own security stack). SLA commitments differ: Critical Start offers ≤15 minutes, Palo Alto Networks offers Not disclosed. Critical Start covers 5 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 6 for Palo Alto Networks.
How do Critical Start and Palo Alto Networks differ in response capabilities?
Critical Start supports 6 autonomous actions (endpoint isolation, process termination, network containment, account disable, file quarantine, custom playbooks) and approval is configurable. Palo Alto Networks supports 6 autonomous actions (endpoint isolation, process termination, network containment, account disable, file quarantine, custom playbooks) and approval is configurable.
How does Critical Start pricing compare to Palo Alto Networks?
Critical Start pricing: Custom-quoted pricing. Palo Alto Networks pricing: Cortex XDR Pro: ~$81/endpoint/year starting (platform only). Unit 42 MDR service is additional custom pricing. Total cost depends on endpoints, tier (Pro vs Premium), coverage scope, and contract terms.. Watch for with Critical Start: No public pricing at all — requires sales call for any ballpark; OT/ICS monitoring and vulnerability management are separate purchases on top of base MDR. Watch for with Palo Alto Networks: Cortex XDR/XSIAM platform license is a significant prerequisite cost on top of MDR service fee; Cortex Data Lake storage costs are separate and scale with data volume.
Should I choose Critical Start or Palo Alto Networks?
Choose Critical Start if: mid-market to large enterprises wanting technology-agnostic MDR that works with their existing security stack. Choose Palo Alto Networks if: enterprise organizations already invested in the Palo Alto ecosystem (NGFW, Prisma, WildFire) wanting native MDR integration. Critical Start is not ideal for sMBs or budget-conscious organizations — enterprise-focused pricing not publicly disclosed. Palo Alto Networks is not ideal for sMBs or budget-constrained organizations — significant prerequisite costs (Cortex XDR + Data Lake) plus MDR service fee.