We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiSOAR and Galvanize IncidentBond based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks, Splunk and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)."The best feature is that onboarding to the SIM solution is quite easy. If you are using cloud-based solutions, it's just a few clicks to migrate it."
"The main benefit is the ease of integration."
"It has basic out-of-the-box integrations with multiple log sources."
"The features that stand out are the detection engine and its integration with multiple data sources."
"Sentinel pricing is good"
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based."
"If you know how to do KQL (kusto query language) queries, which are how you query the log data inside Sentinel, the information is pretty rich. You can get down to a good level of detail regarding event information or notifications."
"We’ve got process improvement that's happened across multiple different fronts within the organization, within our IT organization based on this tool being in place."
"The solution is easy to implement and includes 450 built-in connectors."
"It's great that the solution is integrated with FortiAnalyzer."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiSOAR is the number of available connectors and the simplicity to start to automate."
"It is a scalable solution...The implementation phase of the product was not tough or difficult."
"The good news is that FortiSOAR is not hard to maintain. If you prepared well and deployed strong initially, then maintenance will take half an hour every other week, not more than that. A single person can do it."
"The product can be automated for network security purposes. The solution offers a great security automation response."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It has a quick detection and response time."
"The customization and the transparency of data while still maintaining a mostly user-friendly UI, are key features. It allows for me, as an engineer, to evolve the individual components and modules, and to create a much more meaningful picture than the individual pieces in isolation ever could."
"We'd like also a better ticketing system, which is older."
"While I appreciate the UI itself and the vast amount of information available on the platform, I'm finding the overall user experience to be frustrating due to frequent disconnections and the requirement to repeatedly re-authenticate."
"If I can use Sentinel offline at home and use it on a local network, it would be great. I'm not sure if I can use Sentinel offline versus the tools I have."
"They're giving us the queries so we can plug them right into Sentinel. They need to have a streamlined process for updating them in the tool and knowing when things are updated and knowing when there are new detections available from Microsoft."
"Documentation is the main thing that could be improved. In terms of product usage, the documentation is pretty good, but I'd like a lot more documentation on Kusto Query Language."
"If we want to use more features, we have to pay more. There are multiple solutions on the cloud itself, but the pricing model package isn't consistent, which is confusing to clients."
"The playbook development environment is not as rich as it should be. There are multiple occasions when we face problems while creating the playbook."
"Azure Sentinel will be directly competing with tools such as Splunk or Qradar. These are very established kinds of a product that have been around for the last seven, eight years or more."
"The solution doesn't connect well with the network devices."
"The technology and integrations are important so should continue to be enhanced."
"The area that needs improvement is integration with multiple third-party vendors."
"I have found that Fortinet FortiSOAR needs a lot of improvement. The Orchestration needs to be improved."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR should add more documentation for some use cases."
"Fortinet's tech support overall is not great when they are at their best."
"The UI design of the solution needs to be changed since it can get difficult for a newbie to operate."
"I don't currently see where the solution is lacking features. For us and for our clients it works very well and we're pleased with it."
"Stable – Release – Experimental" system with their releases, and all the proper checks and balances, I’d be an incredibly happy individual. I can appreciate the cause and affect, wherein the customization of the tool drives rapid release schedules, and the paradox that creates with the idea of stable releases. I’d also like more transparency about known bugs and issues."
Earn 20 points
Fortinet FortiSOAR is ranked 10th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 11 reviews while Galvanize IncidentBond is ranked 11th in Security Incident Response. Fortinet FortiSOAR is rated 7.4, while Galvanize IncidentBond is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSOAR writes "A stable solution that has a number of available connectors and is simple to automate". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Galvanize IncidentBond writes "Customization and transparency of data, while maintaining a mostly user-friendly UI". Fortinet FortiSOAR is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, Splunk SOAR, Swimlane, Cisco SecureX and SECDO Platform, whereas Galvanize IncidentBond is most compared with .
We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.