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

Cortex vs IFS Cloud Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 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

Cortex
Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)
21st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IFS Cloud Platform
Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
CRM (20th), Customer Experience Management (8th), Field Service Management (1st), Help Desk Software (12th), ERP (12th), Activity Based Costing Software (6th), Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) (2nd), Local Government CRM (8th), IT Asset Management (10th), License Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the IT Service Management (ITSM) category, the mindshare of Cortex is 0.3%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IFS Cloud Platform is 1.6%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Service Management (ITSM)
 

Featured Reviews

NikhilSharma1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides comprehensive network visibility and helps us identify threats efficiently
The product could be improved in several areas. The complexity and confusion regarding product variants, such as XDR, Forexiant, and Forexon, must be addressed. There is also a need for clearer differentiation between features and capabilities within Cortex's suite, as the overlap between XDR and XIM can be confusing. Improvements in the user interface and more intuitive KQL query handling could also enhance usability. Additionally, better support for various deployment scenarios and cost management options would be beneficial.
Brendan Fisher - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, customizable, and modern
IFS is a very large and complex software, and implementation of IFS can be challenging and may lead to a difficult lengthy project. It can take between 12 and 24 months in some cases to deploy. I have found that not all clients are fully aware of how big the task is that they're undertaking when they make a decision to move to software like this. Companies need to be more aware of the complexity of an ERP implementation project and while I fully recommend moving to IFS, it is not easy and does require business change when adopting an ERP solution. New features are a difficult ask - I work across multiple industries and everyone would probably choose a different feature. Maybe BIM in Construction or Customs link-ups for importers/exporters.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution's stability is generally good."
"It was easy to integrate Cortex with existing infrastructure and other tech tools."
"The solution's most valuable feature is writing playbooks."
"Feature-wise, I like the way it provides inventory details...It is a stable solution."
"What I like about IFS Applications is that it's easier to use and implement than SAP. I also like that the IFS Applications team is more flexible than the SAP team."
"IFS has been completely rebuilt, modernized, and cloud-based so we don't need bulky software installations."
"A high level of ERP can be handled in IFS."
"Individual user profiles that can be configured as templates to minimize data entry."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten since it is an extremely scalable solution that can be used for various use cases with thousands of users."
"We could quickly understand what was going on and what the customer wanted to do."
"The platform is reliable and stable."
 

Cons

"The complexity and confusion regarding product variants, such as XDR, Forexiant, and Forexon, must be addressed."
"It would be more beneficial to integrate threat intelligence in Cortex."
"It's quite lagging and not very fast."
"IFS uses Crystal Report mostly, which isn't too user-friendly. Developing reports isn't easy and requires a lot of dev time. Since SAP bought it, Crystal Report has become more complicated to use on IFS. You have a dashboard for reporting that is good, but it's incomplete. Most of our clients use Power BI or some additional tooling for BI."
"There are certain digital features that need to be incorporated, such as IOP."
"The solution's reporting tools still require improvement."
"An area for improvement would be transactions, which can be tedious to complete as the process is very complex."
"We would like to see AI-driven CSI functions built into the tool that would allow us to quickly tie our improvement goals to metrics and activities, so Assyst will suggest the next steps to help us get closer to our goals."
"Technical support could be improved."
"There should be some improvements in the predefined templates in IFS Applications."
"Customization needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's cheaper compared to its competitors."
"Cortex XDR is a costly solution."
"Cortex is an expensive solution."
"There are varying license levels that you can purchase."
"There's an additional yearly cost for support."
"Ask for all-inclusive pricing, as they are pretty flexible if you ask for custom models."
"It is better to buy implementation services from IFS than from partners"
"Compared to SAP, the pricing for IFS Applications was very affordable. People using the solution would find that it's worth the money."
"I consider it to be a well-priced solution compared to other mid-range or high-end ERP solutions."
"We pay for a license to use the solution, which is not very expensive."
"IFS Applications are competitive in terms of pricing compared to other vendors, such as SAP, Oracle, and Epicor. They are generally cheaper, especially for licensing costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Service Management (ITSM) solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cortex?
It would be more beneficial to integrate threat intelligence in Cortex.
What is your primary use case for Cortex?
With Cortex, we can automate the analysis of all the alerts. We use it to automate any kind of activity.
What do you like most about IFS Applications?
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten since it is an extremely scalable solution that can be used for various use cases with thousands of users.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IFS Applications?
The product is reasonably priced. The costs are justified by the value provided, considering the comprehensive features and minimal need for customization. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with IFS Applications?
I am not able to recall much about batch. Documentation-wise, they need more. There is not much available online, and the documentation availability is on the lower side compared to other products,...
 

Also Known As

No data available
IFS Applications, Assyst, IFS Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
China Airlines, Electrolux Group, Babcock, Cimcorp, Sky, Multiplex, Veolia. 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex vs. IFS Cloud Platform and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.