When you're researching CrowdStrike alternatives, you're looking for cybersecurity companies with similar endpoint protection capabilities, comparable growth trajectories, or different valuation profiles that might fit your investment criteria better. The goal isn't to find identical clones — it's to understand which companies solve the same problems, serve the same markets, or offer similar financial characteristics at potentially more attractive entry points.
Key takeaways
- CrowdStrike's main competitors include Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, SentinelOne, and Zscaler, each with distinct approaches to endpoint and cloud security
- Business models vary from subscription-based endpoint protection to broader network security platforms, affecting growth rates and margin profiles
- Valuation multiples can differ significantly even among similar cybersecurity companies, creating opportunities to find comparable exposure at different price points
- Growth rates, profitability timelines, and total addressable markets help distinguish which alternative might fit specific investment goals
- Comparing customer acquisition costs, net retention rates, and platform breadth reveals operational differences that impact long-term competitiveness
What companies compete directly with CrowdStrike?
The closest alternatives to CrowdStrike operate in the endpoint detection and response space, where software agents installed on devices monitor for threats and respond automatically. SentinelOne offers the most direct comparison — both companies built cloud-native platforms from scratch rather than bolting AI onto legacy architectures. Palo Alto Networks competes through its Cortex XDR platform, though Palo Alto's business extends well beyond endpoints into network security and firewalls. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint represents another alternative, especially for organizations already invested in the Microsoft ecosystem.
Beyond pure endpoint protection, broader cybersecurity platforms create indirect competition. Zscaler focuses on zero-trust network access and secure internet gateways rather than traditional endpoints, but serves similar customer needs as workforces go remote. Fortinet provides unified threat management through physical and virtual appliances, appealing to buyers who want integrated hardware and software. Trend Micro and McAfee remain players, though both carry legacy architectures that some investors view as competitive disadvantages.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR): Software that continuously monitors endpoint devices like laptops and servers to detect suspicious behavior, investigate threats, and respond automatically without human intervention. This approach replaced traditional antivirus software that relied on signature-based detection.
How do their business models compare?
CrowdStrike operates on a subscription model with multiple module tiers — customers start with basic endpoint protection and add capabilities like threat intelligence, vulnerability management, and identity protection. This land-and-expand approach drives high net retention rates, often exceeding 120%, meaning existing customers spend more each year than they did initially. SentinelOne follows a similar playbook, though with a shorter track record and more aggressive discounting to win market share from incumbents.
Palo Alto Networks runs a more complex model spanning hardware appliances, software subscriptions, and professional services. While this diversification provides stability, it also means slower growth rates than pure-play cloud companies. Fortinet similarly blends hardware sales with subscription renewals, creating a revenue mix that some investors find less attractive than pure recurring revenue. Zscaler operates entirely in the cloud with no hardware component, delivering margins that can exceed traditional security vendors once the company reaches scale.
The economics of customer acquisition vary widely. Companies selling to large enterprises face long sales cycles and high upfront costs, but benefit from sticky relationships and expansion revenue. Those targeting mid-market customers can grow faster initially but may face higher churn and lower expansion rates. Understanding where each competitor focuses its go-to-market motion helps explain differences in growth efficiency and profitability timelines.
What do growth rates and profitability look like across alternatives?
Growth rates among stocks like CRWD tend to cluster based on company maturity and market position. Younger companies like SentinelOne have posted revenue growth above 100% year-over-year during hypergrowth phases, though those rates naturally decelerate as the revenue base expands. CrowdStrike itself has demonstrated the ability to maintain growth in the 40-60% range even at significant scale, a performance that distinguishes it from most enterprise software companies. Established players like Palo Alto Networks and Fortinet typically grow in the teens to low twenties, reflecting mature product lines balanced by new platform additions.
Profitability trajectories separate growth-at-all-costs stories from companies demonstrating operating leverage. CrowdStrike reached positive free cash flow while maintaining high growth, a combination that commands premium valuations. SentinelOne has prioritized market share over near-term profitability, burning cash to win customers from incumbents. Zscaler followed a similar path in its earlier years before inflecting to strong cash generation as revenue scaled. The trade-off between growth and profitability creates different risk/reward profiles even among companies with similar products.
Gross margins provide another lens for comparison. Pure software companies typically achieve margins in the 70-80% range, while those selling hardware or delivering managed services see lower margins. High gross margins create more room for sales and marketing investment during growth phases and eventually translate to operating leverage as companies mature. Differences in margin structure explain why some alternatives trade at higher multiples despite slower growth.
Which valuation metrics matter most when comparing alternatives?
Price-to-sales ratios dominate valuation discussions for high-growth cybersecurity companies, especially those not yet profitable on a GAAP basis. This multiple compresses or expands based on growth rates, profitability timelines, and market sentiment toward growth stocks generally. A company growing at 50% might trade at 15-20 times sales, while one growing at 20% might trade at 8-12 times sales, though these ranges shift dramatically based on broader market conditions.
The Rule of 40 provides a framework for comparing growth and profitability together. This guideline suggests that a company's revenue growth rate plus its profit margin should exceed 40% to indicate healthy unit economics. A company growing at 50% with -10% margins hits the threshold, as does one growing at 25% with 15% margins. Companies exceeding the Rule of 40 by wide margins often command premium valuations, while those falling short face skepticism about their business models.
Rule of 40: A benchmark suggesting that a software company's revenue growth rate plus its free cash flow margin (or operating margin) should total at least 40%. This framework helps investors balance growth against profitability when comparing companies at different life stages.
Enterprise value to free cash flow becomes relevant once companies inflect to positive cash generation. This metric matters more than GAAP earnings for subscription businesses, where stock-based compensation and other non-cash charges distort net income. Comparing free cash flow multiples across CRWD competitors reveals which companies the market believes will sustain cash generation versus those still proving out their models.
How do total addressable markets differ across competitors?
CrowdStrike addresses the endpoint security market but has expanded into adjacent areas like cloud security, identity protection, and security analytics. This platform expansion strategy increases the total addressable market from roughly $30 billion for endpoints alone to over $100 billion when including related categories. The credibility of these TAM estimates varies — some represent genuine expansion opportunities, while others involve entering crowded markets where the company lacks incumbency advantages.
SentinelOne targets a similar core market but with less platform breadth currently, though the company continues adding modules. Palo Alto Networks claims one of the largest TAMs in cybersecurity by aggregating network security, endpoints, cloud security, and security operations into a total exceeding $150 billion. The challenge with very large TAM claims is that they often require competing across multiple product categories where specialists dominate. Zscaler's TAM centers on zero-trust architecture and secure access service edge, a category growing faster than traditional perimeter security but smaller in absolute terms.
Market share within these TAMs tells you which companies are winning versus just participating. A company with 5% share in a $50 billion market growing at 15% faces different competitive dynamics than one with 1% share in a $20 billion market growing at 30%. The former offers stability and scale advantages; the latter offers more room for expansion before hitting market saturation. Both can make sense depending on your investment goals and risk tolerance.
What operational metrics distinguish the strongest alternatives?
Net dollar retention rate measures how much existing customers spend over time, with rates above 120% indicating strong expansion revenue. CrowdStrike has consistently posted net retention in the 120-130% range, meaning its customer base grows revenue by at least 20% annually even before adding new logos. This metric demonstrates product stickiness and successful upselling. Competitors with lower net retention may struggle with customer satisfaction, limited expansion opportunities, or more price-sensitive customer segments.
Customer acquisition cost payback period shows how quickly a company recovers the sales and marketing expense required to land a new customer. Payback periods under 18 months generally indicate efficient go-to-market motions, while periods exceeding 24 months raise questions about sales productivity. Companies serving larger enterprises often show longer payback periods but higher lifetime values, while those targeting mid-market customers can achieve faster payback with more modest lifetime values. The ratio of lifetime value to customer acquisition cost provides another angle on the same question.
Module adoption rates reveal platform strength. Companies that successfully sell multiple products to each customer enjoy higher switching costs and better unit economics than those selling point solutions. CrowdStrike's ability to expand from one or two modules per customer to five or six over time demonstrates platform value. Competitors still selling primarily single-product suites face tougher paths to similar economics. Tracking how module adoption trends over time helps predict which companies will achieve the operating leverage their valuations assume.
How do different alternatives fit different investment strategies?
Growth investors typically gravitate toward companies demonstrating the highest revenue growth rates and largest TAM opportunities, accepting negative near-term earnings in exchange for market share gains. SentinelOne fits this profile — higher growth, earlier stage, more volatile, with significant upside if execution continues but meaningful downside if competitive pressures intensify. This approach requires conviction that the company will eventually achieve profitability at scale and tolerance for quarterly volatility.
Growth-at-a-reasonable-price investors look for companies balancing strong growth with improving profitability and reasonable valuation multiples. CrowdStrike has occupied this category as it matured, offering growth rates that still exceed most enterprise software companies while generating positive free cash flow. The trade-off involves paying higher multiples than pure value plays but getting more earnings visibility than pure growth bets. This middle ground appeals to investors who want growth exposure without maximum risk.
Value-oriented investors in the cybersecurity space might consider established players like Fortinet or Palo Alto Networks, where growth has moderated but profitability is well-established and valuations have compressed. These companies lack the explosive growth potential of younger competitors but offer more stability and often return capital through buybacks. The risk is that legacy architectures eventually lose to cloud-native competitors, making today's value trap tomorrow's obsolete business model. Evaluating this technology risk requires understanding product roadmaps and customer feedback beyond just financial metrics.
Try it yourself
Want to run this kind of analysis on your own? Copy any of these prompts and paste them into the Rallies AI Research Assistant:
- Compare CrowdStrike to its top competitors in cybersecurity — who else offers similar endpoint protection, how do their business models and growth rates stack up, and what would make an investor pick one over the others?
- What are the closest alternatives to CrowdStrike? What competitors should I compare it to?
- Show me how net dollar retention rates compare across CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Palo Alto Networks, and Zscaler, and explain what those differences mean for long-term growth potential.
Frequently asked questions
What are the main CRWD competitors in endpoint security?
SentinelOne represents the closest direct competitor with a similar cloud-native architecture and AI-driven approach to endpoint detection and response. Palo Alto Networks competes through its Cortex XDR platform, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint serves as an alternative for organizations already using Microsoft infrastructure. Traditional players like McAfee and Trend Micro remain in the market but with older architectures that many investors view as less competitive against cloud-native platforms.
How do I find stocks like CRWD with similar growth profiles?
Start by screening for companies in the cybersecurity or broader enterprise software sectors with revenue growth above 30-40% and improving profitability metrics. Look for high gross margins, strong net retention rates, and subscription-based business models. The Rallies AI screener lets you filter by these criteria and compare valuation multiples across similar companies. Focus on businesses demonstrating operating leverage — where revenue grows faster than expenses over time.
Which CrowdStrike alternatives offer better value at lower multiples?
Companies like Fortinet and Palo Alto Networks typically trade at lower price-to-sales multiples than CrowdStrike, reflecting slower growth rates but more established profitability. Whether this represents "better value" depends on your time horizon and growth expectations. Lower multiples sometimes signal market skepticism about future growth rather than attractive entry points. Compare the valuation discount to the growth rate differential and assess whether the trade-off makes sense for your portfolio strategy.
What makes an investor choose one cybersecurity stock over another?
The decision often comes down to balancing growth potential against risk tolerance. Younger companies like SentinelOne offer higher growth and more volatility, suiting investors comfortable with wider price swings. Established players provide more stable revenue but slower expansion, fitting conservative portfolios. Product architecture matters too — cloud-native platforms may have longer runways than legacy systems being modernized. Market position, competitive moats, customer concentration, and management execution history all factor into choosing between alternatives.
How important is profitability when comparing alternatives to CrowdStrike?
Profitability matters more as companies mature and as market conditions shift. During periods when investors reward growth regardless of earnings, unprofitable high-growth companies can outperform. When sentiment shifts toward quality and cash generation, profitable growers typically hold up better. The key is whether a company demonstrates a credible path to profitability with improving unit economics, not just whether it's profitable today. Businesses burning cash without clear inflection points face skepticism even if revenue grows quickly.
Can I use Rallies.ai to compare these alternatives side by side?
Yes, the platform's research tools let you pull up multiple companies and compare their financial metrics, growth rates, valuation multiples, and analyst commentary in one view. The stock research pages aggregate data from financial statements, earnings calls, and market data so you can build your own comparisons. The AI Research Assistant can also generate side-by-side analyses when you ask it to compare specific companies across dimensions that matter to your investment process.
What risks do CrowdStrike competitors face that might not show up in financial metrics?
Technology obsolescence represents the biggest non-financial risk — cybersecurity evolves quickly, and today's cutting-edge approach can become tomorrow's legacy system. Customer concentration poses another risk if a large percentage of revenue comes from a small number of clients. Regulatory changes, especially around data privacy and breach disclosure, can shift competitive dynamics unpredictably. Competitive pressure from large tech platforms building native security tools creates existential questions for standalone vendors. These qualitative factors require research beyond just comparing numbers.
How often should I reassess which alternative makes the most sense for my portfolio?
Quarterly earnings releases provide natural checkpoints to reassess competitive position, growth trajectories, and relative valuations. Major product launches, customer wins or losses, management changes, and shifts in market share warrant attention between earnings. That said, reacting to every data point leads to overtrading. Focus on whether the original investment thesis remains intact and whether relative positioning has changed materially. Annual deep reviews combined with quarterly check-ins usually provide enough information without creating noise-driven decisions.
Bottom line
Finding the right CrowdStrike alternatives depends on matching company characteristics to your specific investment criteria — whether you prioritize maximum growth, profitability inflection, valuation discounts, or some combination. The cybersecurity market offers enough variety that you can usually find companies with similar business models at different stages, growth rates, and price points. No single alternative dominates across all dimensions, which is why understanding your own risk tolerance and return requirements matters more than identifying one "best" option.
The companies most comparable to CrowdStrike share cloud-native architectures, subscription models, and exposure to growing enterprise security budgets, but differ in profitability timelines, platform breadth, and market positioning. Running your own analysis helps you decide which trade-offs make sense for your portfolio. Learn more about stock analysis frameworks that help you evaluate these alternatives systematically.
Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice, financial advice, trading advice, or any other type of advice. Rallies.ai does not recommend that any security, portfolio of securities, transaction, or investment strategy is suitable for any specific person. All investments involve risk, including the possible loss of principal. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Before making any investment decision, consult with a qualified financial advisor and conduct your own research.
Written by Gav Blaxberg, CEO of WOLF Financial and Co-Founder of Rallies.ai.
