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

Blink Ops vs Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
6.7
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Blink Ops
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
19th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (9th), AI-Powered Security Automation (4th)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.8%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Blink Ops is 1.5%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is 8.7%, down from 10.8% 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 XSOAR8.7%
Torq3.8%
Blink Ops1.5%
Other86.0%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at Swimlane
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.
AH
CEO at cybovate
Workflow automation has transformed SOC decisions and now manages security workload effectively
At the moment, I have no idea what an improvement can be because my feeling is Blink Ops can be deployed on-site in a hybrid mode or in the cloud. Hybrid mode means more or less the cloud environment running within the cloud. In Switzerland, I have seen quite a few clients where discussions happened and they said they do not want to go to cloud and want to run it on-premises. But the solution is just too big to run on-premises. Having a smaller version on-premises would be helpful, but my feeling is that is hard to achieve because the solution is just too big and too diverse to run on-premises. The other thing is also the support model. Support models normally work if platforms are accessible from outside, but if I need to go within the company and do some modifications on the platform within the company, it is normally just time-consuming. This limits some of the use cases in some clients if they say, okay, we are a nuclear power plant and we do not want anyone coming from outside. At the moment, nothing else comes to my mind because I would say Blink Ops is a comprehensive platform and sometimes I feel people are overwhelmed. Maybe one thing I have had twice now, and I am not sure if this would be a Blink Ops topic or also one of the competitors. On CRM platforms, if someone changes from one CRM platform to the other CRM platform, there are always converters. From one music platform to the other music platform, there are converters. I think that is quite often missing. People struggle and said they had an automation platform or quite often they have seven or several automation platforms and say they want to reduce to, for example, two different platforms and want to get rid of the other ones. But then sometimes it is quite often a redevelopment, especially if it was a no-coding platform and everything is in code. Then normally it requires a huge transformation project. I think really helping the clients understand what the other platform does and then maybe on this level, just having the wizard would be fine. But my feeling is that migrating from one platform to the other is quite difficult.
Sricharan R - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Application Security Engineer Iv at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Security automation has transformed incident workflows and now reduces response time dramatically
I think the areas of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR that could be improved are mainly in UX. We have communicated with the vendor team about this, but they are prioritizing product functionality over usability because most target customers are technical and understand a primitive UI. They face difficulties in implementing UI changes as their team is stretched. Thus, the UI/UX of the tool needs significant improvement. There are plans on their roadmap, but a lot remains to be done. Parts of the tool run on an older framework, causing slowness. Usability is a broader issue than features alone. This usability problem is common in many cybersecurity tools, unlike customer-facing applications. Some integrations have speed issues and might not function seamlessly with different upstream configurations, requiring manual updates. These are the main pain points we encountered, particularly with UI/UX, integration speed, and the usability of certain inbuilt playbooks.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Since we started working with Torq, I am handling much fewer alerts, it is becoming really easy for me to handle an alert, I have all the information that I need, I do not need to connect to different vendors to receive this information, and the main thing I got from Torq is time, which now helps me to build another automated system and learn."
"Under one SOC tool in Torq, analysts get to know everything within the context of an alert or incident they are working on, and this ability to view the whole picture within Torq is one of the major breakthroughs and best offerings of Torq."
"I would say Blink Ops has probably the best technical support of all my vendors."
"I really appreciate the accuracy of prompt engineering and the GUI that Blink offers, as it allows us to evaluate before testing exactly how the workflow will look."
"The solution provides threat intelligence with EDR."
"I'm using Cortex XSOAR to manage our network security."
"The automation is excellent."
"The solution has very good integration capabilities; it's really the best at integration, with commands inside every integration that make it very useful as a product, and the automation is excellent."
"It was easy to integrate Cortex with existing infrastructure and other tech tools."
"The product’s stability is good."
"From the security team's standpoint, the solution has improved our organization's overall cybersecurity."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to configure."
 

Cons

"Additionally, the documentation for Torq is not very clear. Most of the information is presented in videos, which are not ideal for reading; there are mostly paragraphs and other text-based content."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"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."
"It was able to capture data but was unable to differentiate between the agent hostname we are using and the hostname that resides on the back end of the Internet."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"At the moment, nothing else comes to my mind because I would say Blink Ops is a comprehensive platform and sometimes I feel people are overwhelmed."
"The current LLM in Blink is quite accurate, but it still requires a lot of optimization because after a few prompts, it starts creating random responses, which sometimes is problematic."
"It's only one cloud right now. It might be helpful for some companies to have an on-premies option."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR lacks to offer SIEM functionalities currently."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The solution requires DV but does not support open-source DV elastic searches."
"I think they should increase their collaboration base."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"While I personally appreciate this approach, I have observed that junior analysts on my team find it difficult to build playbooks."
"Its dashboard features need improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"There is a perception that it is priced very high compared to other solutions."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is expensive."
"The solution's cost is high."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could be reduced. We are always looking for a discount. There is an annual license needed to use this solution."
"The solution is based on an annual licensing model that is expensive."
"There is a yearly license required for this solution and it is expensive."
"It is expensive."
"The solution is a bit on the expensive side."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise5
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise26
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
I do not dislike anything about Torq because it has satisfied all of our use cases and requirements. We contacted sup...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
Initially, we were using Slack for small automations, such as creating pipelines or shutting down servers. For exampl...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I have been working for five years with experience in the IT field. Torq is very good. It manages everything. I would...
What needs improvement with Blink Ops?
At the moment, I have no idea what an improvement can be because my feeling is Blink Ops can be deployed on-site in a...
What is your primary use case for Blink Ops?
I have several use cases rather than a single one. When we start engagements, it is often for the SOC team on the SOA...
What advice do you have for others considering Blink Ops?
I would say also on automation, there is a need to have the least privilege or a zero trust approach because the agen...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
Comparing pricing to Micro Focus, they were offering bundles, making it free with their SIEM. For customers, it is ze...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
Regarding areas for improvement in Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, I want to highlight one concern about playbook cr...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
My primary use cases for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are malware incidents, specifically phishing-related inciden...
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
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 Blink Ops vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.