Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs FortiCNAPP comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 18, 2025

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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
4th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
3rd
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (3rd), Container Security (3rd), Compliance Management (2nd), AI Software Development (1st), AI Observability (2nd)
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto N...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
28th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
13th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
18th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (12th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (7th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (6th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (5th)
FortiCNAPP
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
41st
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
18th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
26th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (30th), Compliance Management (10th)
 

Featured Reviews

SC
Information Security Engineer at DataVigilant Infotech
Enables us to prioritize and effectively address critical security issues
Evidence-based reporting helps us to prioritize and solve critical security issues. The new visualization feature demonstrates how an attacker can enter the system, highlighting the potential path that can be exploited and outlining all the steps the attacker could take. With that visibility, we can ensure the perimeter is strong and attackers cannot enter, thus reducing the risk. It has helped us prioritize issues. The visibility into how an attack could happen is valuable. For example, it highlights the system vulnerability and outlines where an attack could propagate. The visualization helps me to prioritize remediation, and if I don't know where to start, I can check to see the score that enables me to prioritize issues. I am using infrastructure-as-code scanning, and it's one of the useful features. In pre-production, it identifies embedded secrets and misconfigurations, including issues with Kubernetes or some privileged containers. This feature allows us to pass the audit and secure IaC code so that it isn't easily exploitable by attackers. We can more proactively work to identify and resolve vulnerabilities by using the dashboard and the alerting system that SentinelOne provides. It helps us with audits and compliance. We can show the compliance in percentage. We can confidently say that our company or infrastructure is very secure. It has improved our security posture by 30% to 35%. It has reduced our false positives by 30%. It has helped teams collaborate better. The security team manages SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security, and when it flags vulnerabilities, they are forwarded to DevOps for remediation. Previously, we needed to identify and report the issues, but there would be lapses in communication. Now, there is a centralized dashboard that anyone can look at and see the open issues and work on them.
reviewer1980216 - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager For Palo Alto Networks at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified security platform has simplified multi-cloud protection and improved threat response
From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market. Additionally, there is not a clear MSP model compared to other vendors such as CrowdStrike. These are significant limitations, especially today when managed services are becoming increasingly important for end users. Palo Alto decided to limit some functionalities because they want to stress more on Cortex XSIAM. I do not agree with this strategy because Cortex XSIAM is a completely different market compared to Cortex XDR. This is the main issue of Cortex—the commercial model Palo Alto is implementing. The product is very good; the problem is the commercial model. There are probably some areas for improvement because Palo Alto is growing too much. Today the challenge is to have skilled people, which I believe is the same issue everywhere. I do not agree with this decision.
SK
Software Engineer at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Improving security insights has been helpful but inconsistent vulnerability tracking needs attention
The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly. Regarding improvements, the vulnerability part, recent changes with user management, and Fortinet IM coming into place, which is not helpful at all because it cuts out the automation part, are the most important things. Lacework FortiCNAPP should have a new clean UI and ease of access for the users as that should be the main concern. There are limitations regarding the scalability of Lacework FortiCNAPP. There are also more limitations with integrations like GitHub or any other pipeline, CI/CD, or ISD. It is glitchy and works well only sometimes, and most of the time, the reports or other things are not properly calculated or circulated with the teams.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool identifies issues quickly."
"It is very straightforward. It is not complicated. For the information that it provides, it does a pretty good job."
"SentinelOne's behaviour analytics are valuable because they detect anomalies and malicious behaviour that signature-based solutions might miss."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers several valuable features, most notably the rapid vulnerability notifications that provide timely alerts regarding our infrastructure."
"It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"SentinelOne stands out with its responsiveness to feature requests for Singularity Cloud Security."
"The key strength of Singularity Cloud Security lies in its ability to pinpoint vulnerabilities in our cloud accounts and identify suspicious activity that warrants further investigation."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has impacted our organization positively by keeping our machines secure and our team using the dashboard to find issues quickly."
"I have absolutely seen improvements in our incident close rates, with mean time to detect and respond reduced significantly, sometimes by at least forty to fifty percent."
"The most beneficial aspect of Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Palo Alto in general is that there is a single platform for all cloud providers for securitization."
"The AI and automation features in detecting and responding to high-risk threats are impressive; it's one of the best tools regarding AI technology and unifies security in one platform in real-time, improving vulnerability analysis, incident response, and compliance reporting."
"I have seen several benefits from using Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks: It was easy to use and easy to migrate from the IBM platform."
"The most valuable features I have found in Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks are those that we provided to customers in a stock environment, as we have done some POCs and tried to check how it can help different organizations, and this same solution has been positioned for multiple customers."
"From a technical standpoint or pricing, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a stronger solution in the market at the moment compared to other products from ConnectWise or Symantec."
"Overall, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a technically strong product, and I rate it ten out of ten."
"The compliance reports are definitely most valuable because they save time and are accurate. So, instead of relying on a human going through and checking or providing me with a report, I could just log into Lacework and see for myself."
"Lacework is helping a lot in reducing the noise of the alerts. Usually, whenever you have a tool in place, you have a lot of noise in terms of alerts, but the time for an engineer to look into those alerts is limited. Lacework is helping us to consolidate the information that we are getting from the agents and other sources. We are able to focus only on the things that matter, which is the most valuable thing for us. It saves time, and for investigations, we have the right context to take action."
"The machine learning capability in Lacework FortiCNAPP is used for threat detection, and automated policy recommendation helps to improve my security measures in general."
"There are many valuable features that I use in my daily work. The first are alerts and the event dossier that it generates, based on the severity. That is very insightful and helps me to have a security cap in our infrastructure. The second thing I like is the agent-based vulnerability management, which is the most accurate information."
"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use."
"The most valuable feature is Lacework's ability to distill all the security and audit logs. I recommend it to my customers. Normally, when I consult for other customers that are getting into the cloud, we use native security tools. It's more of a rule-based engine."
"I find the cloud configuration compliance scanning mature. It generates a lot of data and supports major frameworks like ISO 27001 or SOC 2, providing reports and datasets. Another feature I appreciate is setting custom alerts for specific events. Additionally, I value the agent-based monitoring and scanning for compute nodes. It gives us deeper insights into our workloads and helps identify vulnerabilities across our deployed assets."
"For the most part, out-of-the-box, it tells you right away about the things you need to work on. I like the fact that it prioritizes alerts based on severity, so that you can focus your efforts on anything that would be critical/high first, moderate second, and work your way down, trying to continue to improve your security posture."
 

Cons

"We are experiencing problems with Cloud Native Security reporting."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security could be improved with easier integrations to the Singularity Data Lake, particularly for various vendors."
"I request that SentinelOne investigate this false positive, as SentinelOne has a higher false positive rate than other XDR solutions."
"The area of improvement is the cost, which is high compared to other traditional endpoint protections."
"I export CSV. I cannot export graphs. Restricting it to the CSV format has its own disadvantages. These are all machine IP addresses and information. I cannot change it to the JSON format. The export functionality can be improved."
"The areas with room for improvement include the cost, which is higher compared to other security platforms. The dashboard can also be laggy."
"The documentation could be better."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks can be improved by addressing forensic information collection and storage, although I cannot suggest specific things right now, based on what customers might need."
"The negative aspects or areas for improvement in the product include the fact that the cost might be a bit high, which challenges commercials, but not technically."
"Overall, I rate Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks as an eight out of ten. I think that it could improve on price, as I know that the Google solution has the best price, and this is one of the conditions."
"Some aspects of the GUI can be confusing and make it difficult for me to find certain options or navigate where needed."
"From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market."
"There are a couple of the difficulties we encounter in the realm of cybersecurity, or security as a whole, that relate to potentially limited clarity. Having the capacity to perceive the configuration aspect and having the ability to contribute to it holds substantial advantages, in my view. It ranks high, primarily due to its role in guaranteeing compliance and the potential to uncover vulnerabilities, which could infiltrate the system and introduce potential risks. I had been exploring a specific feature that captured my interest. However, just yesterday, I participated in a product update session that announced the imminent arrival of this feature. The feature involves real-time alerting. This was something I had been anticipating, and it seems that this capability is now being integrated, possibly as part of threat intelligence. While anomaly events consistently and promptly appear in the console, certain alerts tend to experience delays before being displayed. Yet, with the recent product update, this issue is expected to be resolved. Currently, a comprehensive view of all policies is available within the console. However, I want a more tailored display of my compliance posture, focusing specifically on policies relevant to me. For instance, if I'm not subject to HIPAA regulations, I'd prefer not to see the HIPAA compliance details. It's worth noting that even with this request, there exists a filtering mechanism to control the type of compliance information visible. This flexibility provides a workaround to my preference, which is why it's challenging for me to definitively state my exact request."
"The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly."
"A feature that I have requested from them is the ability to sort alerts and policies based on a security framework. Right now, when you go into alerts, you have hundreds and hundreds of them that you have to manually pick. It would be useful to have categories for CIS Benchmark or SOC 2 and be able to display all the alerts and policies for one security framework."
"The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses its own LQL query language, and each database across different layers and modules is structured differently, complicating correlation efforts. Consequently, I had to create extensive custom reports outside Lacework because their default dashboards didn't communicate risk metrics. They're addressing these issues by redesigning their tools, including introducing the dashboard, which is a step closer to actionable insights but still needs refinement."
"I would like to see a remote access assistance feature. And the threat-hunting platform could be better."
"Its integrations with third-party SIEMs can be better. That is one of the things that we discussed with them."
"Visibility is lacking, and both compliance-related metrics and IAM security control could be improved."
"The configuration and setup of alerts should be easier. They should make it easier to integrate with systems like Slack and Datadog. I didn't spend too much time on it, but to me, it wasn't as simple as the alerting that I've seen on other systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"It was reasonable pricing for me."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"The pricing for PingSafe in India was more reasonable than other competitors."
"The pricing is somewhat high compared to other market tools."
"The features included in PingSafe justify its price point."
"It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market."
"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
Information not available
"My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz."
"The pricing has gotten better. That scenario was somewhat unstable. They have a rather interesting licensing structure. I believe you get 200 resources per "Lacework unit." It was difficult, in the beginning, to figure out exactly what a "resource" was... That was a problem until about a year or so ago. They have improved it and it has stabilized quite a bit."
"The licensing fee was approximately $80,000 USD, per year."
"It is slightly expensive. It depends on how big your environment is, but it is expensive. Right now, we are spending a lot of money. We have covered all of the cloud providers and most of our colocation facilities as well, so we cannot complain, but it is slightly expensive. It is not super expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
882,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Performing Arts
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business48
Midsize Enterprise22
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
Regarding the pricing for SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security, I do not think it is something I can compare.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
Regarding the downsides of cloud security, I do not have much negative to discuss about cloud security, because it is...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
The solution is costly, with high-end capabilities suitable for enterprises. It is less affordable for startups or sm...
What needs improvement with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Regarding areas for improvement, the tool performs its functions well, but frequent name changes across Palo Alto Net...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks serves as our primary tool for understanding our assets and performing API integra...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lacework?
My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz.
What needs improvement with Lacework?
The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly. ...
What is your primary use case for Lacework?
The major use case for Lacework FortiCNAPP is for security. I'm using it for security internally for my company.
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
No data available
Polygraph, FortiCNP, Lacework
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
J.Crew, AdRoll, Snowflake, VMWare, Iterable, Pure Storage, TrueCar, NerdWallet, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs. FortiCNAPP and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
882,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.