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

Cortex XSIAM vs Torq 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) (14th), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (7th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (8th)
Torq
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
2.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (8th), AI-SOC (13th), AI-Powered Security Automation (2nd)
 

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 2.4%, up 2.3% compared to last year.
Torq, on the other hand, focuses on AI-Powered Security Automation, holds 33.1% mindshare, down 42.1% since last year.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cortex XSIAM2.4%
Splunk Enterprise Security7.4%
Wazuh7.3%
Other82.9%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
AI-Powered Security Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Torq33.1%
Tines36.3%
Blink Ops11.7%
Other18.89999999999999%
AI-Powered Security Automation
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2666148 - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Director at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Integration challenges highlight the need for manual workflows
The standard integrations are very limited, and the integrations available are not listed in the marketplace. Obtaining validation for integrations from Palo Alto takes around eight months, which is quite long. The solution would benefit from having more standard playbooks and templates available, as in other partners. Currently, everything must be created from scratch. In terms of incident response automation, it is quite poor due to the lack of integration with all security tools, making manual intervention necessary.
reviewer2767650 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant at a university with 10,001+ employees
Have found automation to save analyst time but miss more accurate data classification
From our research and testing with the tool, we determined there need to be modifications and changes to train the LLM on the back end. 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. It was unable to do that sort of classification. We concluded this tool would be more suitable for initial ticket management rather than security automation. Regarding data handling, I would give preference to Torq. For case management, Cortex and its dashboards prove more useful. Cortex and Palo's solutions do not have as much capability as Torq provides with the same tools. However, Torq's dashboards could be improved, especially on the case management side.

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."
"The most valuable feature is the integration capability."
"Cortex XSIAM enhances our ability to apply endpoint protection policies, implement restrictions, conduct scans, and engage in sandboxing."
"It operates on a single, extensive database which enables it to excel in detecting threats and anomalies across the network and endpoints, delivering a highly effective and comprehensive security solution."
"One of the valued aspects of the product is its use of artificial intelligence to detect security vulnerabilities."
"The advanced visualization capabilities of the product are important for understanding security trends in an organization."
"Since implementing Cortex XSIAM, incident response times have been significantly reduced by approximately twenty percent."
"I would give Cortex XSIAM a rating of ten out of ten."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
 

Cons

"Cortex XSIAM is on the expensive side and requires substantial improvement in pricing."
"At the beginning, we experienced some difficulties setting up the product with connectivity and infrastructure, but ultimately it functioned really effectively."
"The support could be a bit faster."
"The standard integrations are very limited, and the integrations available are not listed in the marketplace. Obtaining validation for integrations from Palo Alto takes around eight months, which is quite long."
"There is room for improvement in expanding integrations to include more cybersecurity solutions."
"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."
"The platform isn't very developer-friendly and it should provide more flexibility and ease."
"Cortex could improve the detection and online resolution of security vulnerabilities."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Since Palo Alto is trying to get as many new customers as possible, they're offering very competitive pricing."
"The solution is expensive compared to its competitors."
"The solution comes at a significant cost."
"The product cost could be considered value for money compared to other solutions in the market, though it is quite high."
"In terms of pricing, we found Cortex XSIAM to offer a very reasonable and competitive rate."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
879,899 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

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 needs improvement with Torq?
From our research and testing with the tool, we determined there need to be modifications and changes to train the LLM on the back end. It was able to capture data but was unable to differentiate b...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
I used Torq for conducting one of the proof of evaluations for a vendor we are connected with. I am currently working with Omnisoc, which provides SOC services for twenty-three other higher educati...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
One of our members uses AWS, and we receive their feed. This involves triaging AWS-related logs. While I do not have direct work experience with it, I am familiar with AWS-related services and data...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Wazuh, IBM and others in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM). Updated: January 2026.
879,899 professionals have used our research since 2012.