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)
13th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (3rd)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of IBM Resilient is 2.0%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is 10.9%, down from 12.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
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.
NikhilSharma2 - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to multiple playbooks to fetch data from multiple firewalls and utomated several tasks, including vulnerability scans and SOCL (Security Orchestration, Automation
Recently, they started implementing microservices in XSOAR, which has improved quality and addressed previous issues. However, they should focus more on licensing costs. The user licensing fees are quite high. For example, I received a quote for XSOAR, and it was $12,000 per user per year. If you have a SOC team of 30 members/analysts, you're looking at a substantial expense. They should consider reducing these costs since this high pricing seems to be more about profit. So, there is room for improvement in the pricing. Moreover, the reporting and dashboard features are decent but could be improved. The user interface (UI) is quite heavy and takes time to load, which is a major drawback.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The UBA, User Behavior Analytics, is very good."
"What I like most about IBM Resilient is that it has a complete stack, which means you don't need to use different OEM products because you have all you need under the IBM Resilient umbrella. You don't need to worry much about integrations and components because you're working with tested and proven architecture."
"The most valuable thing about it is how easy it is to navigate the user interface."
"The most valuable features of IBM Resilient are its flexibility and customization options for incident response."
"The integration with IBM SIM and the ability to block users during brute force attacks are particularly effective."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"It has an extensive list of integrations that are available out of the box which makes it easy to start."
"The most valuable feature is automation."
"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."
"From the security team's standpoint, the solution has improved our organization's overall cybersecurity."
"The orchestration in XSOAR is significantly easier compared to other SOAR tools I've used."
"I chose Cortex XSOAR because the client also has Palo Alto firewalls. I can incorporate the data from the Palo Alto firewalls into Cortex and send it into the same data lake to manipulate that data. It lets me manage and monitor the data in one place."
"It is a scalable solution. I would rate scalability a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are its overall track record and features that fit our use case."
 

Cons

"IBM Resilient is quite complex, including its configuration."
"IBM Resilient could integrate better with my tools."
"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."
"There are shortcomings with IBM Resilient's technical support team that can be considered for improvement in the future."
"The initial setup is complex."
"This product could be improved with better customization. This product isn't the best on the market like QRadar, but it's actually a good solution. However, some competitors' solutions contain more integration, support, automation, or flexibility."
"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."
"The complexity of Cortex XSOAR has a trade-off with its versatility. The deployment requires integration and the development of integration modules."
"I would love to see more flexibility on what we can display and design on the dashboards."
"There is room for improvement in terms of the pricing model."
"The solution’s price and technical support could be improved."
"The dashboard performance could be improved."
"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 user interface could be a bit better."
"The solution is complicated to learn."
 

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."
"I would rate the tool’s pricing a three out of ten. The tool’s pricing is on a yearly basis."
"There are no costs except for the support services that our company pays in addition to the licensing charges attached to the solution."
"I feel it is an expensive product when my company pays annually for renewal, support, and follow-up."
"We could create unlimited users using the license we had purchased."
"Pricing for the solution is good, in my opinion."
"There is a license you need to pay for in order to use this product."
"The cost of the product is quite high."
"There is a perception that it is priced very high compared to other solutions."
"From the cost perspective, I have heard that its price is a bit high as compared to other similar products."
"It is approx $10,000 or $20,000 per year for two user licenses."
"Cortex XSOAR's price could be lower."
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing is fair. The pricing reflects the value and feature set it offers."
"It is expensive."
"The solution is a bit on the expensive side."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
Even though customers often comment on the price, the potential savings come from managing a large number of security events with a limited number of analysts. This leads to economic advantages des...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
The complexity of Cortex XSOAR has a trade-off with its versatility. The product can be tailored for each deployment to respond to specific customer needs, and this complexity may be seen as a down...
 

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: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.