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

IBM Resilient vs Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR comparison

 

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

IBM Resilient
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
16th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (4th)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of IBM Resilient is 1.9%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is 9.7%, down from 12.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR9.7%
IBM Resilient1.9%
Other88.4%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

Usman Bhatti - PeerSpot reviewer
Simple deployment, scalable, but lacking third-party solution compatibility
Integrating IBM Resilient with other applications can be very difficult and technically challenging. Often, they use the excuse that you are using the latest version of an application, such as an endpoint security system, and they don't have an API or support for it at the moment. There is no automation in the SOAR solution. It's worth noting that many third-party add-on applications needed to be purchased separately to integrate with IBM Resilient. While there were built-in applications available for incident remediation, the selection was limited. Additionally, integrating third-party applications was often a difficult and time-consuming process due to the technical complexity involved.
DayaramGoyal - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers automation but requires enhancements for intuitive configuration
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is a good product with enhanced and efficient playbooks, as demonstrated during our use case simulations. We have implemented automation features, such as automated responses to email threats and automatic configuration of target devices for blocking specific IPs. The analytics feature in Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is impressive. The solution is quite exhaustive regarding integrations, with many pre-integrations available, especially for market-leading products. There might be challenges with make-in-India products, as they tend not to build the necessary connectors. This depends on whether you are selling to enterprises or other customers. For government customers, you might encounter many Indian products, such as firewalls, which could pose integration challenges unless you have open APIs. However, for market-leading products, there are ready-made integrations available.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is very easy to use."
"The solution is simple to use and to integrate with IBM QRadar."
"The most valuable thing about it is how easy it is to navigate the user interface."
"This is a good solution that we recommend for customers."
"The integration with IBM SIM and the ability to block users during brute force attacks are particularly effective."
"The solution is reliable in our usage."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The UBA, User Behavior Analytics, is very good."
"It is a scalable solution."
"What I like most about Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is how user-friendly it is for development. It is much simpler to work with compared to similar tools I've used."
"The repository of playbooks and the integration between Palo Alto and IBM QRadar are some useful features"
"For organizations that are stable with their security operations, like those with around 50 members in their security team running full-phased operations 24/7, Cortex is necessary."
"The orchestration in XSOAR is significantly easier compared to other SOAR tools I've used."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are its overall track record and features that fit our use case."
"It is a scalable solution. I would rate scalability a ten out of ten."
"It has an extensive list of integrations that are available out of the box which makes it easy to start."
 

Cons

"Its price needs improvement."
"The implementation could be a bit simpler."
"What could make IBM Resilient better is if IBM increased the number of built-in integrations with different products from other vendors or third-party products."
"The product must provide more integration with other tools."
"IBM Resilient is quite complex, including its configuration."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The product needs a bit more development."
"Integrating IBM Resilient with other applications can be very difficult and technically challenging. Often, they use the excuse that you are using the latest version of an application, such as an endpoint security system, and they don't have an API or support for it at the moment. There is no automation in the SOAR solution."
"With Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, managing its setup phase can be a complicated task."
"The tool’s multi-tenancy feature must be improved."
"The price of the solution could be lower."
"I think they should increase their collaboration base."
"I would like to see Cortex become less dependent on Active Directory and group policies to manage the deployment. Maybe I need to update my understanding of how to deploy it, but that's the way I know how to use it."
"The product can be tailored for each deployment to respond to specific customer needs, and this complexity may be seen as a downside."
"The solution's technical support could be better."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the look, feel, and management of the cloud console. Additionally, the user could be more easily integrated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing cost for IBM Resilient is not too expensive, but it's not affordable, so it's moderately expensive. Regarding price, I'm rating the solution seven out of ten. The company pays for the license yearly, based on the number of users. Apart from the cost of the license you need to pay for each user, you also need to spend an initial investment for the base platform. You also have to pay for IBM Resilient support."
"Pricing for the solution is good, in my opinion."
"There are no costs except for the support services that our company pays in addition to the licensing charges attached to the solution."
"I would rate the tool’s pricing a three out of ten. The tool’s pricing is on a yearly basis."
"The cost of the product is quite high."
"I feel it is an expensive product when my company pays annually for renewal, support, and follow-up."
"There is a license you need to pay for in order to use this product."
"It is very expensive."
"The solution is a bit on the expensive side."
"There is a perception that it is priced very high compared to other solutions."
"It is approx $10,000 or $20,000 per year for two user licenses."
"From the cost perspective, I have heard that its price is a bit high as compared to other similar products."
"Palo Alto offers significant discounts to customers who purchase the products repeatedly."
"The solution's pricing needs improvement."
"My company did not make any payments towards the licensing costs attached to the product since we were only using its pilot version."
"The solution's cost is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
35%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Resilient?
It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Resilient?
I am not the one in charge of pricing, so I am not sure about the costs.
What needs improvement with IBM Resilient?
Integration with some devices, including Cisco PowerPower and certain antivirus products, has limitations.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
Comparing pricing to Micro Focus, they were offering bundles, making it free with their SIEM. For customers, it is zero versus $20 million, which is why they have to make a decision.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
To improve the solution, it needs to have complete features that are low-code, no-code, and should be plug-and-play. We need to see improvements in that area to facilitate cyber analysts.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Golden Living, Health Equity, USA Funds
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 IBM Resilient vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.