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

Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs ThreatBook comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 31, 2025

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

Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatBook
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
16th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Network Detection and Response (NDR) (14th)
 

Featured Reviews

RichPhillips - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers a centralized dashboard for reporting threats and anomalies
The tool along with other suite of products provides us with threat and alert information.  The solution has provided us with a centralized dashboard for reporting threats and anomalies.  I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security.  I…
RG
Enhancement in incident response through reduced false positives and contextual intelligence
ThreatBook has positively impacted our organization by allowing us to detect all alerts and threats effectively. In the past, we needed to search logs from various sources, including terminals, DI servers, and firewalls, collecting a lot of logs and searching the internet for contextual information about threat actors. After using ThreatBook TDP, all alerts and contexts are easily displayed on the dashboard, making it very helpful for us. During the incident response scenario, ThreatBook saves us over 80% of the time for each incident. We usually took about one day or two days for attribution and understanding how the attacker attacked us, but after using ThreatBook TDP, we usually take around one or two hours to finish all these tasks. Additionally, their AI techniques save a lot of time, allowing me to ask in natural language for explanations about the meaning and target of the attacker.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The logs play a crucial role as they contribute to blocking unwanted Internet traffic."
"It integrates well with other solutions and provides good threat intelligence in terms of external threats."
"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 feature that I like best is the dashboard."
"I would rate Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus a ten out of ten."
"ThreatBook saves us over 80% of the time for each incident."
"ThreatBook saves us over 80% of time for each incident, reducing the usual time taken from one or two days for attribution to just one or two hours, thanks to their AI techniques."
 

Cons

"It would be helpful to have better documentation for configuring and installing the solution."
"It is a completely cloud-based product at present."
"I would like the tool to see more integration with Cortex XDR. There is no real reason to keep them separate."
"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 to have more technical documentation that contains greater detail on the types of threats that are occurring."
"It would be great if ThreatBook could integrate with our ITSM system to streamline the tasks and incident management"
"We’ve seen strong ROI through reduced incident response times, increased threat visibility, and less time wasted on false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive."
"The solution is reasonably priced."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Insurance Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
While Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is effective, I always prefer to have a second source of threat intelligence feed to ensure coverage for zero-day vulnerabilities that might be missed. This is mo...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
I use Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus ( /products/palo-alto-networks-autofocus-reviews ) for threat intelligence. Palo Alto Networks has its own threat intelligence team, Unit 42, which analyzes submi...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatBook?
The procurement process is easy because ThreatBook is a subscription model, and when I need it, I just pay for it. The billing experience is clear with no extra fees; all the costs are clearly show...
What needs improvement with ThreatBook?
It would be great if ThreatBook could integrate with our ITSM system to streamline the tasks and incident management, and I hope this feature will be provided in the future. Everything is perfect, ...
What is your primary use case for ThreatBook?
Mainly, we use ThreatBook TDP to monitor the east-west and north-south network traffic, detect abnormal behaviors, and provide contextual intelligence to support our threat hunting and incident res...
 

Also Known As

Palo Alto Threat Intelligence Management
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Telkom Indonesia
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs. ThreatBook and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.