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

Cortex XSIAM vs ThreatQ comparison

 

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

Cortex XSIAM
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (13th), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (5th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (7th)
ThreatQ
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (12th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Cortex XSIAM is designed for Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) and holds a mindshare of 3.0%, up 1.7% compared to last year.
ThreatQ, on the other hand, focuses on Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP), holds 2.6% mindshare, down 2.9% since last year.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cortex XSIAM3.0%
Wazuh10.2%
Splunk Enterprise Security9.2%
Other77.6%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ThreatQ2.6%
Recorded Future14.6%
CrowdStrike Falcon7.9%
Other74.9%
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
 

Featured Reviews

AKASH MAJUMDER - PeerSpot reviewer
Incident response times have significantly reduced with efficient device integration and log parsing capabilities
Cortex XSIAM needs improvements in terms of data onboarding, parsers, and third-party integration supports. Additionally, a future update request is to enable tagging of endpoints in groups, similar to a feature available in Cortex XDR. The AI analytics need fine-tuning because some use cases are not working from my side.
Yasir Akram - PeerSpot reviewer
Good reporting and pretty stable but needs to be simpler to use
The support team of ThreatQ set up a VM on our VPN, which was SlashNext's private VPN. Then we just initiated some system calls and ThreatQ provided us the configuration file with our settings (like our email, our API key, our URL, our category, etc.). They set up a VM on our private VPN cloud. And then they provided us the configuration file in which we just entered our details like our company URL, our API category, and API keys et cetera. We could just add it on the configuration file. We just uploaded it to the ThreatQ server. After running the system calls, we just initiated the ThreatQ and then performed tasks on the UI, such as categorizing the reports. If we only wanted the report for phishing, then we just manipulated the data on the UI and just extracted the reports. That's all. The deployment was complex. We used high hardware specifications. I don't remember the exact specifications, however, I recall them being high. There were some services that had some compatibility errors. That's why we had our VMs - to make sure that the customer would not face any errors. Everything's deployed with high specifications and custom specifications. That was the biggest challenge for us - to deploy on the customer VMs. On average, deployment takes 15-20 minutes if it's deployed without any errors. I was with one of the NetOps network admin during deployment. We were only two people and we just deployed and installed all services and we executed the deployment.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The way the solution responds to detections and warnings is really impressive."
"It is an effective solution in terms of performance and functionalities."
"Since implementing Cortex XSIAM, incident response times have been significantly reduced by approximately twenty percent."
"The advanced visualization capabilities of the product are important for understanding security trends in an organization."
"I would give Cortex XSIAM a rating of ten out of ten."
"The automation capabilities significantly improve response times by allowing us to respond to incidents from a single dashboard rather than navigating multiple dashboards."
"It does a better job of identifying anomalies that are more likely to be incidents of compromise without as many false positives or false negatives."
"Cortex XSIAM enhances our ability to apply endpoint protection policies, implement restrictions, conduct scans, and engage in sandboxing."
"The reporting services are great. With reporting services, if you have customers that just visit a URL you can see the result - including why it's blocked and how and how the URL was first recognized as malicious."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
 

Cons

"I would rate the overall stability a six or seven, as we have only used it for a few months and need a year of experience to provide a full assessment."
"Cortex XSIAM needs improvements in terms of data onboarding, parsers, and third-party integration supports."
"The standard integrations are very limited, and the integrations available are not listed in the marketplace."
"Cortex XSIAM is on the expensive side and requires substantial improvement in pricing."
"The platform isn't very developer-friendly and it should provide more flexibility and ease."
"At the beginning, we experienced some difficulties setting up the product with connectivity and infrastructure, but ultimately it functioned really effectively."
"The first impression is that XSIAM would be more expensive than others we tried."
"I am not sure if any improvements are needed right now."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of pricing, we found Cortex XSIAM to offer a very reasonable and competitive rate."
"The solution comes at a significant cost."
"The solution is expensive compared to its competitors."
"Since Palo Alto is trying to get as many new customers as possible, they're offering very competitive pricing."
"The product cost could be considered value for money compared to other solutions in the market, though it is quite high."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cortex XSIAM?
It is an effective solution in terms of performance and functionalities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex XSIAM?
I did not participate in pricing discussions for Cortex XSIAM solutions, so I cannot provide a review regarding prices for this solution.
What needs improvement with Cortex XSIAM?
Cortex XSIAM is on the expensive side and requires substantial improvement in pricing. There are other features that could be improved, including integration with vendors such as CyberArk. I would ...
What do you like most about ThreatQ?
Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy.
What needs improvement with ThreatQ?
The tool is not user-friendly. It is not beginner-friendly. It would be very difficult for a beginner to learn the tool. It will take at least two months to get familiar with it. Building the playb...
What is your primary use case for ThreatQ?
We used the solution for threat mapping and managing IoCs.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Wazuh, Microsoft and others in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM). Updated: September 2025.
871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.