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

Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 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

Group-IB Threat Intelligence
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
17th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) category, the mindshare of Group-IB Threat Intelligence is 1.9%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is 1.2%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Group-IB Threat Intelligence1.9%
Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus1.2%
Other96.9%
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
 

Featured Reviews

ALEX LOGINOV - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Partner at INTEGRISEC CONSULTING
Completely satisfied with the way the report is prepared and easy to setup
We did use it for threat detection, but not directly. I analyze multiple reports, including this one, and assess my client's infrastructure. I identify threats outlined in the reports that may be relevant to the client's infrastructure, and then I help them build detection use cases. There's no automation. We don't do anything automatically at this point. It's all manual and based on analysis. I can't integrate it into automatic feeds because the report outlines threats that may not be relevant to the client's infrastructure. So, I do the analysis and integrate it manually. I'm completely satisfied with the way the report is prepared. It's a good report.
reviewer9216065 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Cloud Security Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Seamless integration into existing ecosystem empowers effective threat detection
The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is its seamless integration into the Palo Alto Networks ecosystem, allowing the threat intelligence feeds to be automatically consumed without manual effort. It uses the STIX format, which is automatically understood by the firewalls. AutoFocus also excels in behavioral analytics and reputation scoring, providing thorough threat analysis.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The totality of the recordings is quite important. The networks, the new threat actors, the new methods, tactics, techniques, and procedures."
"We have found the site intelligence features to be the most valuable."
"Threat Intelligence's best feature is threat activation."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the sandbox."
"The most valuable Group-IB Threat Intelligence features are their detections, especially in terms of account and card information leakage. This data sets Group-IB apart from some of the competition."
"I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security."
"The most valuable feature is alerting."
"The logs play a crucial role as they contribute to blocking unwanted Internet traffic."
"Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus has had a positive impact on my company as we can reduce the cost for the SOC investment, and we can also get good feedback on how to strengthen our network from the expertise people available."
"I would rate Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus a ten out of ten."
"It integrates well with other solutions and provides good threat intelligence in terms of external threats."
"The feature that I like best is the dashboard."
 

Cons

"The lack of appliance-based or on-premise options for this solution is its biggest downfall. Clients request them often."
"As the landscape evolves, they could provide a little more detail or specificity to map it to the MITRE ATT&CK framework."
"The web intelligence could be improved. It is not as good as the intelligence from other solutions."
"Group-IB Threat Intelligence should improve integration for SIEM and SOAR solutions."
"Threat Intelligence's OT security could be improved."
"I would like to have more technical documentation that contains greater detail on the types of threats that are occurring."
"It would be helpful to have better documentation for configuring and installing the solution."
"It is a completely cloud-based product at present."
"It would be better if they used the threat intelligence feeds directly from their side and changing the verdict instead of us requesting it."
"I would like the tool to see more integration with Cortex XDR. There is no real reason to keep them separate."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is alright. It's right on the mark."
"Group-IB Threat Intelligence's pricing is reasonable."
"Threat Intelligence is costly, but it gives value for money."
"The solution is reasonably priced."
"It is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Performing Arts
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Group-IB Threat Intelligence?
The pricing is alright. It's right on the mark. It costs money, but it's not too high. It's reasonable. For me, it's a reasonable price for the quality of the product.
What needs improvement with Group-IB Threat Intelligence?
As the landscape evolves, they could provide a little more detail or specificity to map it to the MITRE ATT&CK framework. Even though it is done in the report, it could be done better.
What is your primary use case for Group-IB Threat Intelligence?
I used it to build the strategic threat forecast. The annual forecast for clients.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
I feel that Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus can improve, especially since most of the OEMs are implementing MDR, Managed Service feature, which is still not available with Palo Alto. The MDR feature i...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
I use Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus for threat monitoring, and it is provided by the OEM itself. I use the threat data correlation feature, which correlates with Cortex. We can use it for data corre...
What advice do you have for others considering Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
As a partner with Palo Alto Networks, my email is Sarvajit at bsrgroup.in. My job title is Technical Manager. I confirm that we will publish these reviews on peerspot.com in written or audio format...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Palo Alto Threat Intelligence Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs. Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.