No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs ServiceNow Security Operations comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

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

Torq
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (2nd), SOC as a Service (3rd)
ServiceNow Security Operations
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (1st), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (9th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (17th)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at ProArch
Automation has streamlined multi-tenant SOC workflows and improves alert handling efficiency
Although the reporting within Torq is not that great, we did ask for many features regarding reporting in Torq, but due to some platform constraints, they could not make the whole dataset available for us to be used in reporting. Except for that, we used some basic reporting. When I used Torq, it was indeed in the early stages of AI capabilities. Only a few customers were allowed to use it, and we were among them. It functioned well as long as we summarized the data properly. If you input garbage, you would get garbage out. Thus, we had to do significant fine-tuning regarding what data context we provided to the AI orchestrator to get meaningful results. In terms of Torq's unified platform approach to AI SOC automation and case management compared to managing multiple point solutions across my security stack, I find it case-centric. The unified view in case management is good since it provides clarity, although there are limitations regarding how many items in case management can be modified at once. Bulk operations are very limited, potentially due to their back-end database or data retrieval processes that can be improved. Regarding improvements for Torq, when we were onboarded, there were aspects we were uncertain about, such as the number of cases that could be generated, what data we could bring in, how many clients we could onboard, and similar concerns. Initially, we also lacked clarity about the number of playbooks or workflows we could build. Different triggers like system triggers, case-based triggers, and others can be employed without restrictions, but when it comes to on-demand and scheduled jobs, there is a limitation based on the subscription and pricing tier that notably caps the number of workflows we can create. No bulk editing across cases was one issue, along with limited filtering related to single grouping constraints. Additionally, the out-of-the-box case templates provided require substantial modifications before they become usable. There is also a feature in the cases for notes that cannot be searched. They are only visible through the UI, which is another area for improvement. The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially. I am not sure if new customers are made aware of this. It seems that workflows revolving around cases hinder functionality outside of case management, as we have many use cases needing on-demand triggers and schedules for functions like reporting or polling devices. Creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers. While they facilitate optimization and scaling, the support received tends to be very basic. Improvements can be made in that area as well.
EricRise - PeerSpot reviewer
Noc Network Engineer at a outsourcing company with 51-200 employees
Automation playbooks have reduced soc noise and now streamline daily incident response
To improve Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, there can be a learning curve to it. It is not a very user-friendly product; it is complex. It handles debugs and automation playbooks. You have to really spend some time dedicated to learning the product, scripting, and acquiring your certifications on it. Cost is another item as well. That can be quite significant; it does depend on other tools for EDR, whether you are using Palo Alto's XDR system or any number of third-party products for that. There are some reporting and logging restrictions and limitations. Some of those are going to be constraints, including window size limits. Database use with it has limited scalability for that type of application.
SH
Freelancer at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Gaining unified control over vulnerabilities has improved governance but pricing and support need work
The market price is slightly high. The pricing should be a little lower because this is a SaaS-based product. Everyone using ServiceNow might be getting many modules, but the overall module cost becomes high with license consumption one by one. I personally see that if ServiceNow is to grow over the next decade, they need to work on the pricing part. Cheap providers are emerging, and in the age of AI, it is evident that the chatbot and the virtual agent features, which are prominent features of ServiceNow, could be completely compromised and replaced by people choosing other tools. If ServiceNow develops a strategy to lower the price and increase the customer base, it could help ServiceNow to grow for another decade. I encountered one issue in ServiceNow Security Operations. The different tools, for example, Tenable and TVM, discovered vulnerabilities that had very limited information when imported. However, the same vulnerabilities from different sources, the TVM and Tenable, had shorter descriptions than what was present in the common vulnerabilities or CVE. If this depends on the implementer, such as Tenable or how other security operations implement them, the text was very limited. Customers were asking questions about why this was happening and if ServiceNow was working properly. The vulnerability information should be updated and the common text should be displayed every time, regardless of how many different tools are used for integration. The vulnerability database should be consistent when it comes to the description to avoid confusion for customers implementing it for the first time. This is an improvement that ServiceNow can make.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"If I review about 100 vendors that I might work with, Torq is definitely in the top five that gave me personally investment back, just because every bit of effort I put into Torq eventually became a workflow that gave it back to me."
"We have seen fewer failures of automations from the time Torq came into the picture, we've had a more streamlined process of handling incidents, and at the same time, we've learned to embed the AI into our incident types, and that is how it has helped us in the automation."
"Torq has changed the day-to-day experience for my security analysts and me by saving literally thousands of man-hours per month since we have implemented some of these use cases."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Torq has exceeded expectations by delivering workflows in a timely and lower effort manner than XSOAR, and it meets all my needs while saving a ton of time and targeting $600,000 saved this year, which is a substantial amount of money."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"Torq offers the best feature through integration with AI."
"According to positive outcomes, Torq reduced manual work and made incident response more efficient."
"Cortex XSOAR's playbook for incident management and automation is highly valuable."
"The time to respond was reduced by approximately sixty percent, which specifically reduced the manual effort required from analysts."
"The most valuable feature is its capability to automate responses and collect information for any security event before you even delve into the details. It's a vast product with an active roadmap, so I'm satisfied with it for now. It's very efficient at data collection and correlation."
"The most valuable feature is automation."
"The most valuable features are simplicity and ease of integration."
"The most valuable feature is automation, as there is a huge variety of automation that can help any team and there is a threat model."
"I'm using Cortex XSOAR to manage our network security."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is a good product with enhanced and efficient playbooks, as demonstrated during our use case simulations."
"ServiceNow Security Operations has helped me in getting more precise results."
"Multiple projects use the ServiceNow tool because it is a low-cost and open-source tool."
"It gives you the ability to bring data into the system. The workflows are out of the box, and it gives you the ability to auto-assign the incidents based on criteria and vulnerabilities."
"When things are set up correctly it goes really smooth, however, it's getting there that takes time."
"It has helped optimize security costs by consolidating multiple tools into one platform."
"The SOAR module of ServiceNow Security Operations is the most valuable feature"
"ServiceNow is a convenient platform to raise tickets, and the respective support team will contact us to resolve any issues."
"ServiceNow Security Operations collects data from various sources and presents it in a single, respectable format for assessment and action, providing a unified user experience where all work and fixes can be managed from one location."
 

Cons

"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"I think the platform could be improved by making advanced workflow troubleshooting easier."
"However, we did encounter some problems with custom steps, which definitely affected our progress, and the speed of bug fixes is also a bit slower than expected."
"Additionally, the documentation for Torq is not very clear. Most of the information is presented in videos, which are not ideal for reading; there are mostly paragraphs and other text-based content."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially, and creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers."
"I wish Torq's AI assistant for building templated workflows from scratch worked better; when you start with a blank slate, asking AI to help you build or template the workflow out does not go well."
"The configuration of the solution could improve it is difficult."
"The platform’s setup procedures could be streamlined compared to one of its competitors."
"It is not a very scalable solution."
"The negative aspect of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is the price; cost-wise, it is a bit higher."
"The solution is very expensive."
"While I personally appreciate this approach, I have observed that junior analysts on my team find it difficult to build playbooks."
"There should be an on-premise version available for customers to have different choices."
"It's quite lagging and not very fast."
"One area for improvement for the product is the need to tailor and alter some codes for customization, which can cause issues during upgrades. It does not support customized operations."
"There are limitations for the third-parties that are providing the inputs. They should increase the robustness of the solution."
"There is room for improvement in terms of developer support and documentation."
"We'd like customization to be easier in terms of the UI and using the dashboards."
"Customer awareness and understanding of ServiceNow's SecOps capabilities could be improved."
"I would rate technical support for ServiceNow Security Operations as a six out of ten in terms of faster resolution."
"It would be ideal if there were already integrations available in ServiceNow with third-party tools."
"It is challenging for the customers to understand the processes for SecOps. It needs to be simplified."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There is a yearly license required for this solution and it is expensive."
"The solution is a bit on the expensive side."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is comparable to other solutions in the market."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could be reduced. We are always looking for a discount. There is an annual license needed to use this solution."
"The solution is expensive."
"Palo Alto offers significant discounts to customers who purchase the products repeatedly."
"There is a perception that it is priced very high compared to other solutions."
"It is expensive."
"It is an expensive product."
"This product is a good value for the money."
"Compared to competitor tools, ServiceNow Security Operations is more affordable"
"If you're going to implement it on your own, there would be internal costs. If you're going to implement it through a contractor or consultant, you have to pay for that."
"The product is more expensive than other solutions."
"The solution is more expensive than BMC Remedy, the other ITSM tool available in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
921,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise33
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it ...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is for managing IT services and providing faster response.
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would rate Torq a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I chose this rating because customer service is excellent. I suggest to...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
We can quantify the reduction. It is more than sixty to seventy percent reduction in the MTTR, as per documents from ...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
The negative aspect of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is the price; cost-wise, it is a bit higher. Other than enterp...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
We are a partner for Palo Alto as a service provider. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is used as a SIEM solution or X...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ServiceNow Security Operations?
In my opinion, the pricing is quite affordable considering the features, and I do not find it expensive. I would not ...
What needs improvement with ServiceNow Security Operations?
I would like to see new features added, particularly regarding the incident upgrading part. For instance, if you have...
What advice do you have for others considering ServiceNow Security Operations?
For someone looking to use ServiceNow Security Operations, I recommend that they read about the documentation and spe...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Cellcom Israel, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, esri, Cylance, Flatiron Health, Veeva, ADT Cybersecurity
DXC Technology, Freedom Security Alliance, Prime Therapeutics, Seton Hall University, York Risk Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs. ServiceNow Security Operations and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
921,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.