Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs ThreatQ comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus and ThreatQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs. ThreatQ report (Updated: September 2022).
632,611 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"It integrates well with other solutions and provides good threat intelligence in terms of external threats.""The most valuable feature is alerting."

More Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus Pros →

"The reporting services are great. With reporting services, if you have customers that just visit a URL you can see the result - including why it's blocked and how and how the URL was first recognized as malicious."

More ThreatQ Pros →

Cons
"It would be better if they used the threat intelligence feeds directly from their side and changing the verdict instead of us requesting it.""It is a completely cloud-based product at present."

More Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus Cons →

"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."

More ThreatQ Cons →

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
632,611 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer:At times in AutoFocus, when you have a homegrown application or you check another threat intelligence feed, it's not malicious but is still categorized as gray. We need to request a change in the… more »
Top Answer:We are using AutoFocus with my playbooks. We use it on a daily basis. We receive alerts on the Playbook. We receive alerts for threat intelligence, malware alerts, and virus alerts. We use Autofocus… more »
Top Answer:The reporting services are great. With reporting services, if you have customers that just visit a URL you can see the result - including why it's blocked and how and how the URL was first recognized… more »
Top Answer:I'm not sure if the solution is currently missing any features. I haven't noticed anything that could be added. The biggest challenge is the deployment. The installation of the ThreatQ only takes the… more »
Top Answer:Initially, the solution was assigned to just extract the reports we needed. We just integrated our threat feed URLs to the ThreatQ platform. We could create a report which was like a categorized… more »
Ranking
Views
1,307
Comparisons
767
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
398
Rating
8.0
Views
1,339
Comparisons
846
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
767
Rating
7.0
Comparisons
Learn More
Overview

AutoFocus contextual threat intelligence service accelerates analysis, correlation and prevention workflows. Unique, targeted attacks are automatically prioritized with full context, allowing security teams to respond to critical attacks faster, without additional IT security resources.

ThreatQ is a Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) designed to enable threat operations and management. ThreatQ is the only solution with an integrated Threat Library, Adaptive Workbench and Open Exchange that help you to act upon the most relevant threats facing your organization and to get more out of your existing security infrastructure.

Offer
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus
Learn more about ThreatQ
Sample Customers
Telkom Indonesia
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider14%
Computer Software Company13%
Energy/Utilities Company10%
Insurance Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company20%
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider11%
Government7%
Company Size
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business23%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise63%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business22%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise63%
Buyer's Guide
Threat Intelligence Platforms
September 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, Recorded Future, Cybersixgill and others in Threat Intelligence Platforms. Updated: September 2022.
632,611 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is ranked 12th in Threat Intelligence Platforms with 2 reviews while ThreatQ is ranked 11th in Threat Intelligence Platforms with 1 review. Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is rated 8.0, while ThreatQ is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus writes "Identifies critical attacks, easy to use, stable, and integrates well ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatQ writes "Good reporting and pretty stable but needs to be simpler to use". Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is most compared with Cisco Threat Grid, Recorded Future, Mandiant Advantage, IBM X-Force and ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP), whereas ThreatQ is most compared with ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP), Anomali ThreatStream, Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, IntSights and Recorded Future.

See our list of best Threat Intelligence Platforms vendors.

We monitor all Threat Intelligence Platforms reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.