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

IBM Security QRadar vs Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.5
IBM Security QRadar is praised for efficient monitoring, low costs, valuable analytics, and beneficial long-term security investments.
Sentiment score
6.9
Cortex XSOAR enhances ROI by automating tasks, requiring mature SOC processes for effective use and reduced false positives.
With SOAR, the workflow takes one minute or less to complete the analysis.
Investing this amount was very much worth it for my organization.
We are positioning Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, which can be used in the SOC and do a lot of automation for the customer.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.1
IBM Security QRadar's customer service is praised overall, though technical support quality varies, with notable regional differences.
Sentiment score
6.4
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR support is responsive and skilled, though experiences vary with occasional delays and access issues.
They assist with advanced issues, such as hardware or other problems, that are not part of standard operations.
Support needs to understand the issue first, then escalate it to the engineering team.
The support is really good; for instance, if a critical ticket is submitted, you will get paged right away as it gets logged, and their analyst will look into it, letting you know as soon as possible so you can work on it.
Their support has been better than Anomali's and they are more responsive.
The technical support provided by Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is good.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
IBM Security QRadar is scalable and flexible, accommodating thousands of users and devices, though some express pricing concerns.
Sentiment score
7.3
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is praised for scalability and integration, handling enterprise demands with careful large deployment planning.
For EPS license, if you increase or exceed the EPS license, you cannot receive events.
The scalability of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR supports our growth and security needs because we can integrate various tools and continuously add more capability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
IBM Security QRadar is generally stable, though some users face challenges with updates, configurations, scalability, and high log volumes.
Sentiment score
7.5
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is stable and reliable, with occasional bugs and performance issues, especially in cloud environments.
I think QRadar is stable and currently satisfies my needs.
The product has been stable so far.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM Security QRadar users seek improvements in interface design, integration, automation, cost-efficiency, and advanced analytics for better usability.
Cortex XSOAR requires improved documentation, expanded IoT support, enhanced features, and better pricing for streamlined integration and user experience.
We receive logs from different types of devices and need a way to correlate them effectively.
If AI-related support can suggest rules and integrate with existing security devices like MD, IPS, this SIM can create more relevant rules.
IBM Security QRadar does not support Canvas, so we had to create custom scripts and workarounds to pull logs from Canvas.
The deployment requires integration and the development of integration modules.
One of the significant issues we encounter is system slowdown when we receive an influx of alerts, which inhibits how quickly we can access the information needed for investigation.
To improve the solution, it needs to have complete features that are low-code, no-code, and should be plug-and-play.
 

Setup Cost

IBM Security QRadar is costly yet efficient, priced on Events Per Second, and offers negotiable, simplified annual licensing.
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is costly but offers valuable integration and features, appealing to medium and large enterprises.
Splunk is more expensive than IBM Security QRadar.
For customers, it is zero versus $20 million, which is why they have to make a decision.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Security QRadar is a scalable, user-friendly platform praised for rapid insights, advanced machine learning, and integration capabilities.
Cortex XSOAR excels in integration, automation, and customization, enhancing security operations with efficient orchestration and high user satisfaction.
Recently, I faced an incident, a cyber incident, and it was detected in real time.
IBM is seeking information about IBM QRadar because a part of QRadar, especially in the cloud, has been sold to Palo Alto.
We have FortiSOAR and IBM Resilient for IBM Security QRadar orchestration.
Execution of automatic tasks for collecting, enriching, and correlating security events from hundreds of different technologies.
If I already have an established process, I do not have to change my process to fit into the tool. I can modify the tool to fit into my process, which makes things considerably easier.
We have implemented automation features, such as automated responses to email threats and automatic configuration of target devices for blocking specific IPs.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Security QRadar
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
210
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (6th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (4th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (17th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (8th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (11th)
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 Security QRadar is 7.1%, down from 9.6% 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 Security QRadar7.1%
Other83.2%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

Mahmoud Younes - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable installation and diverse use cases provide strong value
IBM Security QRadar has some areas for improvement. We have missed some DSM components. We need to customize logs where there is no DSM or connector for certain products. We can integrate but we have missed the DSM, which is the connector to pass logs coming from different applications. For example, with a university customer, we tried onboarding Canvas service. IBM Security QRadar does not support Canvas, so we had to create custom scripts and workarounds to pull logs from Canvas.
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Jun 28, 2015
Qradar vs. ArcSight
Continuing with the SIEM posts we have done at Infosecnirvana, this post is a Head to head comparison of the two Industry leading SIEM products in the market – HP ArcSight and IBM QRadar Both the products have consistently been in the Gartner Leaders Quadrant. Both HP and IBM took over niche SIEM…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
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 Business88
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise102
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

What are the biggest differences between Securonix UEBA, Exabeam, and IBM QRadar?
It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendlier GUI and are not licensed based on capacity (amount of logs and information in...
What SOC product do you recommend?
For tools I’d recommend: -SIEM- LogRhythm -SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is asking to miss details that are critical, and ending up a statistic. Also, rememb...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Security QRadar?
When comparing with Splunk, IBM Security QRadar's cost is reasonable. Splunk is more expensive than IBM Security QRadar.
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

IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
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 Security QRadar vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.