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

DFLabs IncMan SOAR vs Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

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

Torq
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
DFLabs IncMan SOAR
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (29th)
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 (2nd)
 

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.
reviewer1137807 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Team Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Protects an organization from the threat of a data breach or cyberattack
The vendors themselves will actually help with any customizations a client may require. Many vendors don't offer this service or if they do, they charge very high rates. Their vendors are very helpful; they will walk you through the whole Playbook until you have a good grasp of the product. Also, in terms of integration, it is very seamless compared to other cybersecurity products. They also have good features such as multi-tenancy. Every user would like to see these kinds of fanciful features on a robust interface. It actually makes the user feel like they are in a sci-fi movie.
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

"Torq has exceeded expectations by delivering workflows in a timely and lower effort manner than XSOAR, and it meets all my needs while saving a ton of time and targeting $600,000 saved this year, which is a substantial amount of money."
"Torq has definitely changed the day-to-day experience for our security analysts, as they feel more excited and feel that Torq interface and workflow allow them to build things themselves."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"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."
"Since we started working with Torq, I am handling much fewer alerts, it is becoming really easy for me to handle an alert, I have all the information that I need, I do not need to connect to different vendors to receive this information, and the main thing I got from Torq is time, which now helps me to build another automated system and learn."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"The vendors themselves will actually help with any customizations a client may require, and their vendors are very helpful; they will walk you through the whole Playbook until you have a good grasp of the product."
"It was easy to integrate Cortex with existing infrastructure and other tech tools."
"We've had a very positive experience."
"The strengths of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR stem from the fact that it provides functionalities related to patching and URL blocking...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable features of Cortex XSOAR include its vast library of plugins, which allow us to integrate various tools and solutions seamlessly."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR can reduce the Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR) drastically because there is a lot of automation which has already been implemented."
"Palo Alto has reduced the time that it takes to go through the process of investigating a reported abuse."
"The repository of playbooks and the integration between Palo Alto and IBM QRadar are some useful features"
"Palo Alto is easy to use."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"Torq can be improved by adding some more features, such as adding more automation and providing a no-code option so I don't have to code for everything."
"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."
"The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially, and creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"The case management piece, due to the platform being an automation-first tool, lacks real robust out-of-the-box case templates or good solutions for creating those without spending a lot of time doing development work, which makes the overall experience poor, honestly."
"The support is not 24/7."
"Because we are located in Singapore, there is a time-zone difference with customer support. The support is not 24/7 so we have to work with them on their schedule for deployment and customization, which is usually in the afternoon, Singapore time."
"The negative aspect of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is the price; cost-wise, it is a bit higher."
"The integration could be better. Cortex, for example, does not work with iPhone."
"The tool’s multi-tenancy feature must be improved."
"The price of the solution could be lower."
"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."
"Potential users should not purchase this product. They decommissioned the product, and it is now at end of life."
"Another area I can suggest is the searching or reporting feature where you have to write a query, which is definitely good for searching your incidents."
"I believe ease of use would be an improvement for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, as I see this as a valuable feature for future iterations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"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."
"The solution's cost is high."
"The solution is based on an annual licensing model that is expensive."
"It is approx $10,000 or $20,000 per year for two user licenses."
"The solution's pricing needs improvement."
"Cortex XSOAR's price could be lower."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is expensive."
"From the cost perspective, I have heard that its price is a bit high as compared to other similar products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
916,197 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
No data available
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 Business6
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise13
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise33
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
There are some bugs in Torq, of course. They can be present in data transformation, some UI debugging, and other area...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is the automation of cyber security processes through a SOAR platform and APIs. A main exam...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
Regarding someone thinking about using Torq, I recommend looking into their provided academy to start working with th...
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
DFLabs IncMan Incident Response
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
University of Advancing Technology, Cybersecurity Ventures
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 Splunk, Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR). Updated: October 2026.
916,197 professionals have used our research since 2012.