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 (21st), Customer Experience Management (7th), Field Service Management (2nd), Help Desk Software (11th), ERP (13th), Activity Based Costing Software (7th), Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) (3rd), Local Government CRM (6th), IT Asset Management (10th), License Management (3rd)
 

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 most valuable feature is writing playbooks."
"The solution's stability is generally good."
"It was easy to integrate Cortex with existing infrastructure and other tech tools."
"The most valuable features of IFS Applications are their intuitiveness and ease of use. The navigations are also straightforward, which makes it easy to train users. The feedback I always receive is that it is very user-friendly."
"IFS Applications' best feature is the user-friendly interface that has a .NET Framework application in the front end and an Oracle database and WebLogic middleware."
"The product is quite flexible."
"The most valuable feature is the distribution module."
"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."
"A high level of ERP can be handled in IFS."
"I like the connectivity and interfaces. In V10, it's easy to modify the interfaces and layouts, but it's becoming more complicated in the cloud. IFS is excellent at asset maintenance and incident management. They have specialized modules for IFS that cover incident and asset management and everything else connected to finance. The reporting in IFS is also easy to use."
"There are fewer fields on the user screen compared to other products. This makes the UI a little bit easier to understand."
 

Cons

"It's quite lagging and not very fast."
"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."
"The solution's initial setup process was complex...The technical support my company receives from the implementation partners of the solution is not that great."
"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."
"The next version has already been released, and some of the technical things are a little bit behind the curve in development. This is specifically security, maintenance, security role maintenance, and creation. This is in their new product, called IFS Cloud."
"It would be ideal if, in the future, the product could incorporate IoT and blockchain elements. We'd like to explore more of these types of features going forward."
"The support provided by IFS Applications has room for improvement. I'm based in Poland, and when my company had an issue, finding people from IFS to give my company the support it needed was difficult."
"There are certain digital features that need to be incorporated, such as IOP."
"Some kind of bot assistance, some kind of artificial intelligence to help people solve the problems, would be interesting."
"Aspects of HR and payroll could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cortex XDR is a costly solution."
"It's cheaper compared to its competitors."
"Cortex is an expensive solution."
"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."
"There's an additional yearly cost for support."
"Compared to SAP, the pricing for IFS Applications was very affordable. People using the solution would find that it's worth the money."
"Licensing is on an annual basis, with no additional costs."
"Ask for all-inclusive pricing, as they are pretty flexible if you ask for custom models."
"We pay for a license to use the solution, which is not very expensive."
"It is better to buy implementation services from IFS than from partners"
"I consider it to be a well-priced solution compared to other mid-range or high-end ERP solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Service Management (ITSM) solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
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: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.