Head to head · Checked against vendor sites, September 2026
Koi (Palo Alto Networks) vs Glow Security: AI agent security compared
The verdict
Koi scores higher overall on our weights (7.1 vs 6.7 out of 10). Koi scores higher on visibility, footprint, maturity and breadth; Glow Security scores higher on identity and audit. They tie on tool-call control and policy. Neither publishes list prices.
Koi (Palo Alto Networks Cortex Agentic Endpoint Security)
Owner: Palo Alto Networks (acquisition completed 14 April 2026)
Best for Palo Alto Cortex customers
How do Koi and Glow Security compare on each criterion?
| Criterion | Weight | Koi | Glow Security | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visibility | 22% | 9 | 8 | Koi |
Why these scoresKoi: Visibility into models, MCPs, extensions and packages on the endpoint, with risk scoring. Glow Security: Positions itself as control over everything that runs on the endpoint, with Asset Intelligence and shadow AI discovery; its Anthropic integration collects per-user Claude usage, custom skills and installed connectors. | ||||
| Tool-call control | 20% | 7 | 7 | Tie |
Why these scoresKoi: Blocks unsafe AI application interactions and prevents prompt injections; tool-call level mechanics not published. Glow Security: Glow describes a pre-execution hook that can block an action or hold it for approval, and runtime prevention policies for coding agents; per-call mechanics are not documented on pages we could read. | ||||
| Policy | 15% | 7 | 7 | Tie |
Why these scoresKoi: Out-of-the-box policies and one-click removal of insecure packages, extensions and AI tools. Glow Security: Adaptable policies with autonomous remediation and prevention agents, and a Claude Code managed-settings bundle through its Anthropic integration. | ||||
| Identity and audit | 12% | 5 | 6 | Glow Security |
Why these scoresKoi: Agent vs human attribution not described on the pages we reviewed. Glow Security: Per-user Claude usage and a compliance audit trail through the Anthropic integration, which needs Claude Enterprise and the Compliance API; attribution for other agents is not described. | ||||
| Footprint | 13% | 6 | 5 | Koi |
Why these scoresKoi: Agent-based; offered as a Cortex XDR module and as a standalone offering. Glow Security: How Glow reaches devices is not stated on its homepage, and its documentation site could not be read. | ||||
| Breadth | 8% | 7 | 6 | Koi |
Why these scoresKoi: Palo Alto Networks is integrating Koi with Prisma AIRS for wider AI coverage. Glow Security: Covers software control and asset intelligence beyond AI tools, plus enterprise AI accounts and settings through the Anthropic integration; cloud workloads are not described. | ||||
| Maturity | 10% | 7 | 6 | Koi |
Why these scoresKoi: Acquisition completed 14 April 2026 by Palo Alto Networks; pricing not published. Glow Security: Came out of stealth on 22 July 2026 with $180M at a $1.2B valuation, led by Sequoia, Cyberstarts, Greenoaks and Redpoint; named customer quotes and a trust center on glow.io; no pricing. | ||||
| Total | 100% | 7.1 | 6.7 | Koi |
How do they deploy, and what do they cost?
| Attribute | Koi | Glow Security |
|---|---|---|
| Owner | Palo Alto Networks (acquisition completed 14 April 2026) | Not acquired |
| How it reaches devices | Cortex XDR module or standalone agent | Not published |
| Deployment detail | Integrates with Cortex XDR as a module and is also available standalone as an agent-based deployment. If you run Cortex XDR, this is the lowest-friction path; if you run another EDR, expect a separate agent. | How Glow reaches devices is not stated on its homepage, and its documentation site could not be read. |
| Pricing | Contact sales. Pricing is not published. | Contact sales. Glow Security does not publish pricing. |
Source: Cortex Agentic Endpoint Security · Press release, 14 April 2026 · glow.io · Glow Anthropic integration · Glow research: developer screenshots exposed by AI agents (29 Sep 2026) · Glow emerges from stealth (22 Jul 2026) · Reviewed Sep 2026
Which should you choose?
Choose Koi if
- Your priority matches our designation for Koi: best for Palo Alto Cortex customers.
- You need a fleet-wide inventory of AI agents, MCP servers, extensions and credentials on devices: Koi scores 9 to 8.
- You want a light rollout with published deployment detail, ideally through existing EDR or MDM: Koi scores 6 to 5.
Choose Glow Security if
- Your priority matches our designation for Glow Security: best for software control across the endpoint.
- You need an audit record that separates agent actions from human actions: Glow Security scores 6 to 5.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Koi (Palo Alto Networks) or Glow Security?
Koi scores higher overall on our weights (7.1 vs 6.7 out of 10). Koi scores higher on visibility, footprint, maturity and breadth; Glow Security scores higher on identity and audit. They tie on tool-call control and policy. Scores are editorial assessments from public vendor material, reviewed September 2026.
Do Koi (Palo Alto Networks) and Glow Security publish prices?
No. Neither publishes list prices, so ask both for a quote.
Do Koi (Palo Alto Networks) or Glow Security replace EDR?
No. The tools in this guide add control over AI agent actions and work alongside EDR. Koi: Cortex XDR module or standalone agent. Glow Security: Not published.
Related
Sources
- Cortex Agentic Endpoint Security · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Press release, 14 April 2026 · Reviewed Sep 2026
- glow.io · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Glow Anthropic integration · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Glow research: developer screenshots exposed by AI agents (29 Sep 2026) · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Glow emerges from stealth (22 Jul 2026) · Reviewed Sep 2026