Head to head · Checked against vendor sites, September 2026
Noma Security vs Koi (Palo Alto Networks): AI agent security compared
The verdict
Noma Security scores higher overall on our weights (7.5 vs 7.1 out of 10). Noma Security scores higher on footprint, identity and audit and breadth; Koi scores higher on visibility. They tie on tool-call control, policy and maturity. 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 Noma Security and Koi compare on each criterion?
| Criterion | Weight | Noma Security | Koi | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visibility | 22% | 8 | 9 | Koi |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Discovers endpoint agents such as Claude Code, Cursor and Codex with their MCP servers and skills. Koi: Visibility into models, MCPs, extensions and packages on the endpoint, with risk scoring. | ||||
| Tool-call control | 20% | 7 | 7 | Tie |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Blocks unauthorized and malicious agents and stops risky behavior at runtime; per-tool-call mechanics are described less specifically. Koi: Blocks unsafe AI application interactions and prevents prompt injections; tool-call level mechanics not published. | ||||
| Policy | 15% | 7 | 7 | Tie |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Runtime inspection across the event, the session, the identity behind the agent and the data it reaches; action types beyond block not detailed. Koi: Out-of-the-box policies and one-click removal of insecure packages, extensions and AI tools. | ||||
| Identity and audit | 12% | 7 | 5 | Noma Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Keeps a live registry of allowed agents, MCP servers and skills and inspects the identity behind each agent. Koi: Agent vs human attribution not described on the pages we reviewed. | ||||
| Footprint | 13% | 8 | 6 | Noma Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Discovers endpoint agents through existing EDR or MDM with no new endpoint agent to deploy. Koi: Agent-based; offered as a Cortex XDR module and as a standalone offering. | ||||
| Breadth | 8% | 9 | 7 | Noma Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Covers endpoint, SaaS and homegrown agents, plus AI-SPM and AI red teaming. Koi: Palo Alto Networks is integrating Koi with Prisma AIRS for wider AI coverage. | ||||
| Maturity | 10% | 7 | 7 | Tie |
Why these scoresNoma Security: SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 9001 and HIPAA listed; Gartner recognition cited by the vendor; pricing not published. Koi: Acquisition completed 14 April 2026 by Palo Alto Networks; pricing not published. | ||||
| Total | 100% | 7.5 | 7.1 | Noma Security |
How do they deploy, and what do they cost?
| Attribute | Noma Security | Koi |
|---|---|---|
| Owner | Not acquired | Palo Alto Networks (acquisition completed 14 April 2026) |
| How it reaches devices | Through existing EDR or MDM | Cortex XDR module or standalone agent |
| Deployment detail | Noma states that it discovers agents, MCP servers and skills on employee endpoints through your existing EDR or MDM, with no new endpoint agent to deploy. SaaS and homegrown agent coverage connects through the platforms and environments where those agents run. | 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. |
| Pricing | Contact sales. Noma Security does not publish pricing. | Contact sales. Pricing is not published. |
Source: noma.security · Noma endpoint agents · Noma platform · Cortex Agentic Endpoint Security · Press release, 14 April 2026 · Reviewed Sep 2026
Which should you choose?
Choose Noma Security if
- Your priority matches our designation for Noma Security: best for endpoint plus SaaS and homegrown agents.
- You want a light rollout with published deployment detail, ideally through existing EDR or MDM: Noma Security scores 8 to 6.
- You need an audit record that separates agent actions from human actions: Noma Security scores 7 to 5.
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.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Noma Security or Koi (Palo Alto Networks)?
Noma Security scores higher overall on our weights (7.5 vs 7.1 out of 10). Noma Security scores higher on footprint, identity and audit and breadth; Koi scores higher on visibility. They tie on tool-call control, policy and maturity. Scores are editorial assessments from public vendor material, reviewed September 2026.
Do Noma Security and Koi (Palo Alto Networks) publish prices?
No. Neither publishes list prices, so ask both for a quote.
Do Noma Security or Koi (Palo Alto Networks) replace EDR?
No. The tools in this guide add control over AI agent actions and work alongside EDR. Noma Security: Through existing EDR or MDM. Koi: Cortex XDR module or standalone agent.
Related
Sources
- noma.security · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Noma endpoint agents · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Noma platform · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Cortex Agentic Endpoint Security · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Press release, 14 April 2026 · Reviewed Sep 2026