No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Security Hub vs Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Torq
Sponsored
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
AWS Security Hub
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (12th)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.6%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of AWS Security Hub is 6.0%, down from 8.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is 8.9%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR8.9%
Torq3.6%
AWS Security Hub6.0%
Other81.5%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at ProArch
Automation has streamlined multi-tenant SOC workflows and improves alert handling efficiency
Although the reporting within Torq is not that great, we did ask for many features regarding reporting in Torq, but due to some platform constraints, they could not make the whole dataset available for us to be used in reporting. Except for that, we used some basic reporting. When I used Torq, it was indeed in the early stages of AI capabilities. Only a few customers were allowed to use it, and we were among them. It functioned well as long as we summarized the data properly. If you input garbage, you would get garbage out. Thus, we had to do significant fine-tuning regarding what data context we provided to the AI orchestrator to get meaningful results. In terms of Torq's unified platform approach to AI SOC automation and case management compared to managing multiple point solutions across my security stack, I find it case-centric. The unified view in case management is good since it provides clarity, although there are limitations regarding how many items in case management can be modified at once. Bulk operations are very limited, potentially due to their back-end database or data retrieval processes that can be improved. Regarding improvements for Torq, when we were onboarded, there were aspects we were uncertain about, such as the number of cases that could be generated, what data we could bring in, how many clients we could onboard, and similar concerns. Initially, we also lacked clarity about the number of playbooks or workflows we could build. Different triggers like system triggers, case-based triggers, and others can be employed without restrictions, but when it comes to on-demand and scheduled jobs, there is a limitation based on the subscription and pricing tier that notably caps the number of workflows we can create. No bulk editing across cases was one issue, along with limited filtering related to single grouping constraints. Additionally, the out-of-the-box case templates provided require substantial modifications before they become usable. There is also a feature in the cases for notes that cannot be searched. They are only visible through the UI, which is another area for improvement. The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially. I am not sure if new customers are made aware of this. It seems that workflows revolving around cases hinder functionality outside of case management, as we have many use cases needing on-demand triggers and schedules for functions like reporting or polling devices. Creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers. While they facilitate optimization and scaling, the support received tends to be very basic. Improvements can be made in that area as well.
Karthik Ekambaram - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at Scybers
Has helped identify misconfigurations and prioritize risks but lacks multi-cloud support and deeper integration features
AWS Security Hub cannot scale up to multiple different cloud environments; it only works for AWS. There are other products in the market for CSPM that can give you multi-cloud environment misconfigurations, even Microsoft for that matter. Regarding the integration of AWS Security Hub with third-party tools, I am not certain whether we can integrate them, but there is no need to do so. However, AWS Security Hub cannot integrate with other cloud providers, so it only supports the AWS environment. The compliance checks within AWS Security Hub are good, but we don't use them much. We utilize compliance frameworks such as CIS compliance frameworks and ISO 27017 framework, which are beneficial, but it can improve in other areas too, such as including NIST and other frameworks beyond just ISO and CIS. Improvements can be applicable for scalability, particularly on integration with multi-cloud environments, and compliance frameworks can be added for more variety as well. The unified dashboard in AWS Security Hub is adequate; I cannot say it is exceptional, but the content available in the dashboards is satisfactory for now.
EricRise - PeerSpot reviewer
Noc Network Engineer at a outsourcing company with 51-200 employees
Automation playbooks have reduced soc noise and now streamline daily incident response
To improve Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, there can be a learning curve to it. It is not a very user-friendly product; it is complex. It handles debugs and automation playbooks. You have to really spend some time dedicated to learning the product, scripting, and acquiring your certifications on it. Cost is another item as well. That can be quite significant; it does depend on other tools for EDR, whether you are using Palo Alto's XDR system or any number of third-party products for that. There are some reporting and logging restrictions and limitations. Some of those are going to be constraints, including window size limits. Database use with it has limited scalability for that type of application.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"Torq has exceeded expectations by delivering workflows in a timely and lower effort manner than XSOAR, and it meets all my needs while saving a ton of time and targeting $600,000 saved this year, which is a substantial amount of money."
"What I liked the most about Torq is the actual workflow builder, which is really great because they offer a lot of features and convenience features that are useful for any automation engineer."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"If I review about 100 vendors that I might work with, Torq is definitely in the top five that gave me personally investment back, just because every bit of effort I put into Torq eventually became a workflow that gave it back to me."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"Torq has definitely changed the day-to-day experience for our security analysts, as they feel more excited and feel that Torq interface and workflow allow them to build things themselves."
"The most valuable feature of AWS Security Hub is the ability to track when monitoring is not enabled on any of my resources."
"AWS Security Hub brings many features into one table that is quite useful, and the app team finds it easier to see what is missing."
"The solution is very good at detection and providing real-time alerts."
"Security Hub provides insightful information about what is running and where there might be weaknesses."
"I find all of the features to be highly valuable."
"I like that AWS Security Hub currently has several good features, around four or five. The technical support for AWS Security Hub is also responsive."
"AWS Security Hub's unified dashboard does help streamline my process of identifying vulnerabilities, but we don't use Inspector."
"This solution is for security posture management for the cloud, showing the security posture of your cloud infrastructure and giving you good insight into whether your infrastructure is secure or not."
"The playbook automation helped streamline my incident response time by removing delays from the human side and reducing the mean time to respond."
"The pricing is very good."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is a good product with enhanced and efficient playbooks, as demonstrated during our use case simulations."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are its overall track record and features that fit our use case."
"The Palo Alto ecosystem has a marketplace offering integration with Sentinel or other products."
"The biggest advantage in Cortex XSOAR that I see is its extensive AI capabilities, where it unifies all your log collection mechanisms and can ingest the logs from almost all of the end devices."
"I am satisfied with the product overall."
"Each incident collected is orchestrated with automation that selects the security analyst to be involved, or provides complex execution plans for managing security incidents."
 

Cons

"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"Torq can be improved by adding some more features, such as adding more automation and providing a no-code option so I don't have to code for everything."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially, and creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"I wish Torq's AI assistant for building templated workflows from scratch worked better; when you start with a blank slate, asking AI to help you build or template the workflow out does not go well."
"Shortening the response time for support tickets, particularly in production issues, could make the service more efficient."
"The telemetry doesn't always go into the control center. When you have multiple instances running in AWS, you need a control tower to take feeds from Security Hub and analyze your results. Sometimes exemptions aren't passed between the control tower and Security Hub. The configuration gets mixed up or you don't get the desired results."
"However, the sheer number of services can be overwhelming when implementing something new."
"One aspect that could be improved in the solution is its adaptability to different markets and geopolitical restrictions. In certain regions like Thailand, specific services from certain countries or providers, such as AWS or Azure, might be limited or blocked. It also needs improvement in would require configuring the solution more adaptable to AWS infrastructure and function."
"It is not flexible for multi-cloud environments."
"Security needs to be measured based on their own criteria. We can't add custom criteria specific to our organization. For example, having an S3 bucket publicly available might be flagged as a critical alert, but it might not be critical in a sandbox environment. So, it gets flagged as critical, which becomes a false positive. So, customization options and creating custom dashboards would be areas for improvement."
"The integration of AWS Security Hub has not helped much in maintaining my organization's security posture."
"Security Hub is currently not worth investing in, as it requires more configurations and integration with other services to work effectively."
"It doesn't offer automatic internet reports out of the box."
"With Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, managing its setup phase can be a complicated task."
"Customization and performance can be improved. For example, some formats were incompatible when integrating, and they said we needed to work with the vendor to fix this issue because some logs that AVA logs were not compatible, and it did not readily recognize the format."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"It is both difficult to implement, deploy, and integrate the product."
"The user interface (UI) is quite heavy and takes time to load, which is a major drawback."
"The dashboard performance could be improved."
"We need a little hands-on experience to install the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There are multiple subscription models, like yearly, monthly, and packaged."
"The cost is based on the number of compliances, core checks, and services required, and for more than 10,000 recommendations, the charge is just one dollar."
"The price of AWS Security Hub is average compared to other solutions."
"AWS Security Hub is not an expensive tool. I would consider it to be a cheap solution. AWS Security Hub follows the PAYG pricing model, meaning you will have to pay for whatever you use."
"The pricing is fine. It is not an expensive tool."
"AWS Security Hub's pricing is pretty reasonable."
"Security Hub is not an expensive solution."
"The price of the solution is not very competitive but it is reasonable."
"It's cheaper compared to its competitors."
"My company did not make any payments towards the licensing costs attached to the product since we were only using its pilot version."
"There is a perception that it is priced very high compared to other solutions."
"Palo Alto offers significant discounts to customers who purchase the products repeatedly."
"The solution is expensive."
"When I first looked at Demisto, it had a price tag of $250,000 but when we finally purchased it, it was $345,000."
"The solution's cost is high."
"The solution's cost is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
909,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186927 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Operations at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Feb 16, 2015
Cybereason vs. Interset vs. SQRRL
Capture DB - they all use NoSQL db and hence solve the ad hoc query and 'go back in time' problem with current best of breed SIEM and DLP solutions that rely on real time analysis of incoming logs (and don't store them). This means deeper and quicker iterative threat analysis and assessment…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise32
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
The only thing is more out-of-the-box integrations. Torq already has a lot of supported integrations and adding new o...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
For Torq, first of all, it's a hyperautomation and AI assistant usage. Our EDR SentinelOne is integrated in Torq and ...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I think I have told everything about Torq that I can share at this stage, but I am still in the process of learning t...
Which is better - Azure Sentinel or AWS Security Hub?
We like that Azure Sentinel does not require as much maintenance as legacy SIEMs that are on-premises. Azure Sentinel...
What needs improvement with AWS Security Hub?
I do not see any areas for improvement in AWS Security Hub itself, but the cost factor is something that is the main ...
What is your primary use case for AWS Security Hub?
AWS Security Hub is something I have used daily as it is a part of my job for cloud security purposes. If you are dea...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is that I was just a consum...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR can be improved if it can include AI modules within Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR a...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
My main use case for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is that we use it as a SOAR platform, Security Orchestration and...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SQRRL
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Edmunds, Frame.io, GoDaddy, Realtor.com
Cellcom Israel, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, esri, Cylance, Flatiron Health, Veeva, ADT Cybersecurity
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Security Hub vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
909,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.