Kroll vs Palo Alto Networks: MDR Comparison 2026
Kroll (MDR provider) and Palo Alto Networks (EDR vendor) take different approaches to managed detection and response. Kroll works with your existing tools, while Palo Alto Networks requires its own security platform. Kroll targets SMB, Mid-market, and Enterprise organizations; Palo Alto Networks focuses on Mid-market and Enterprise. Kroll 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
Kroll vs Palo Alto Networks: Which Should You Choose?
Choose Kroll if:
- •Organizations wanting IR expertise built into MDR -- 3,000+ annual cases feeding detection, not just monitoring
- •Enterprises needing full threat eradication including forensics and root cause analysis, not just containment
- •Regulated industries needing compliance reporting, IR pedigree, and included $1M breach warranty
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
Bottom line: Palo Alto Networks is the choice if you want a single-vendor stack with deep integration. Kroll is better if you have existing tools and want flexibility.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main difference between Kroll and Palo Alto Networks?
Kroll 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). Kroll covers 5 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 6 for Palo Alto Networks.
How do Kroll and Palo Alto Networks differ in response capabilities?
Kroll 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. Incident response is included with Kroll and not included with Palo Alto Networks.
How does Kroll pricing compare to Palo Alto Networks?
Kroll pricing: Not publicly disclosed. Unverified field estimates suggest $30K-$200K+/year depending on scope.. 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 Kroll: CrowdStrike Falcon Complete migration (Dec 2025) increases platform dependency -- customers wanting vendor-agnostic EDR lose that flexibility; Named TAM support (vs. Shared TAM) likely incurs additional cost; cost delta not disclosed. 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 Kroll or Palo Alto Networks?
Choose Kroll if: organizations wanting IR expertise built into MDR -- 3,000+ annual cases feeding detection, not just monitoring. Choose Palo Alto Networks if: enterprise organizations already invested in the Palo Alto ecosystem (NGFW, Prisma, WildFire) wanting native MDR integration. Kroll is not ideal for organizations that need vendor-agnostic EDR choice (CrowdStrike migration reduces flexibility). Palo Alto Networks is not ideal for sMBs or budget-constrained organizations — significant prerequisite costs (Cortex XDR + Data Lake) plus MDR service fee.