No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cyware Cyber Fusion vs Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 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

Torq
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Cyware Cyber Fusion
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (27th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (22nd)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (2nd), SOC as a Service (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at ProArch
Automation has streamlined multi-tenant SOC workflows and improves alert handling efficiency
Although the reporting within Torq is not that great, we did ask for many features regarding reporting in Torq, but due to some platform constraints, they could not make the whole dataset available for us to be used in reporting. Except for that, we used some basic reporting. When I used Torq, it was indeed in the early stages of AI capabilities. Only a few customers were allowed to use it, and we were among them. It functioned well as long as we summarized the data properly. If you input garbage, you would get garbage out. Thus, we had to do significant fine-tuning regarding what data context we provided to the AI orchestrator to get meaningful results. In terms of Torq's unified platform approach to AI SOC automation and case management compared to managing multiple point solutions across my security stack, I find it case-centric. The unified view in case management is good since it provides clarity, although there are limitations regarding how many items in case management can be modified at once. Bulk operations are very limited, potentially due to their back-end database or data retrieval processes that can be improved. Regarding improvements for Torq, when we were onboarded, there were aspects we were uncertain about, such as the number of cases that could be generated, what data we could bring in, how many clients we could onboard, and similar concerns. Initially, we also lacked clarity about the number of playbooks or workflows we could build. Different triggers like system triggers, case-based triggers, and others can be employed without restrictions, but when it comes to on-demand and scheduled jobs, there is a limitation based on the subscription and pricing tier that notably caps the number of workflows we can create. No bulk editing across cases was one issue, along with limited filtering related to single grouping constraints. Additionally, the out-of-the-box case templates provided require substantial modifications before they become usable. There is also a feature in the cases for notes that cannot be searched. They are only visible through the UI, which is another area for improvement. The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially. I am not sure if new customers are made aware of this. It seems that workflows revolving around cases hinder functionality outside of case management, as we have many use cases needing on-demand triggers and schedules for functions like reporting or polling devices. Creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers. While they facilitate optimization and scaling, the support received tends to be very basic. Improvements can be made in that area as well.
AhmedKonsowa - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Pre-Sales Engineer (Commercial Sector) at Cyber Knight
A stable solution with excellent features and a helpful technical support team
We use the solution for cyber fusion centers The product has a lot of strong points compared to other tools. The prices must be reduced. I have been using the solution for one year. I am using the latest version of the solution. I rate the tool’s stability a nine out of ten. In my company,…
EricRise - PeerSpot reviewer
Noc Network Engineer at a outsourcing company with 51-200 employees
Automation playbooks have reduced soc noise and now streamline daily incident response
To improve Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, there can be a learning curve to it. It is not a very user-friendly product; it is complex. It handles debugs and automation playbooks. You have to really spend some time dedicated to learning the product, scripting, and acquiring your certifications on it. Cost is another item as well. That can be quite significant; it does depend on other tools for EDR, whether you are using Palo Alto's XDR system or any number of third-party products for that. There are some reporting and logging restrictions and limitations. Some of those are going to be constraints, including window size limits. Database use with it has limited scalability for that type of application.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"According to positive outcomes, Torq reduced manual work and made incident response more efficient."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Torq has impacted my organization positively by allowing us to earn time and invest resources in other projects that are more meaningful and more interesting, pushing deeper into what a SOC is, and building our processes."
"If I review about 100 vendors that I might work with, Torq is definitely in the top five that gave me personally investment back, just because every bit of effort I put into Torq eventually became a workflow that gave it back to me."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"What I liked the most about Torq is the actual workflow builder, which is really great because they offer a lot of features and convenience features that are useful for any automation engineer."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"The technical support team is helpful."
"The product is stable."
"The pricing is very good."
"The most valuable features of Cortex XSOAR include its vast library of plugins, which allow us to integrate various tools and solutions seamlessly."
"I am satisfied with the product overall."
"Cortex XSOAR's most valuable features are the playbooks, custom integration, the machine-learning model, and the layout, classifier, and mapper."
"It’s easy to install."
"The product is quite easy to use."
"It was easy to integrate Cortex with existing infrastructure and other tech tools."
"Its agility and scalability are valuable."
 

Cons

"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"Additionally, the documentation for Torq is not very clear. Most of the information is presented in videos, which are not ideal for reading; there are mostly paragraphs and other text-based content."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"I wish Torq's AI assistant for building templated workflows from scratch worked better; when you start with a blank slate, asking AI to help you build or template the workflow out does not go well."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it still provides faster response and saves time."
"The prices must be reduced."
"The tool doesn't integrate well with ServiceNow."
"The biggest area for improvement is simplifying playbook development and debugging."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"Customization and performance can be improved. For example, some formats were incompatible when integrating, and they said we needed to work with the vendor to fix this issue because some logs that AVA logs were not compatible, and it did not readily recognize the format."
"While I personally appreciate this approach, I have observed that junior analysts on my team find it difficult to build playbooks."
"The licensing is paid on a yearly basis. It is quite expensive."
"Creating complex playbooks using coding languages, such as Python, could be easier."
"The dashboard could be better."
"The solution's correlation rules and playbooks should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"The solution's pricing needs improvement."
"The solution's cost is high."
"The solution is expensive."
"From the cost perspective, I have heard that its price is a bit high as compared to other similar products."
"My company did not make any payments towards the licensing costs attached to the product since we were only using its pilot version."
"It is approx $10,000 or $20,000 per year for two user licenses."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price, I rate the pricing a nine."
"It is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
21%
Construction Company
11%
Healthcare Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise13
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise33
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it ...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is for managing IT services and providing faster response.
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would rate Torq a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I chose this rating because customer service is excellent. I suggest to...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
We can quantify the reduction. It is more than sixty to seventy percent reduction in the MTTR, as per documents from ...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
The negative aspect of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is the price; cost-wise, it is a bit higher. Other than enterp...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
We are a partner for Palo Alto as a service provider. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is used as a SIEM solution or X...
 

Also Known As

No data available
CSOL, Fusion and Threat Response, Threat Intelligence eXchange, Security Orchestration and Automation (SOAR)
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Cellcom Israel, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, esri, Cylance, Flatiron Health, Veeva, ADT Cybersecurity
Find out what your peers are saying about Cyware Cyber Fusion vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.