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

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs Swimlane comparison

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
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (2nd), AI-Powered Security Automation (2nd)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (2nd)
Swimlane
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
AI-Powered Security Automation (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.7%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is 8.8%, down from 10.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Swimlane is 2.8%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR8.8%
Torq3.7%
Swimlane2.8%
Other84.7%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
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.
Sricharan R - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Application Security Engineer Iv at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Security automation has transformed incident workflows and now reduces response time dramatically
I think the areas of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR that could be improved are mainly in UX. We have communicated with the vendor team about this, but they are prioritizing product functionality over usability because most target customers are technical and understand a primitive UI. They face difficulties in implementing UI changes as their team is stretched. Thus, the UI/UX of the tool needs significant improvement. There are plans on their roadmap, but a lot remains to be done. Parts of the tool run on an older framework, causing slowness. Usability is a broader issue than features alone. This usability problem is common in many cybersecurity tools, unlike customer-facing applications. Some integrations have speed issues and might not function seamlessly with different upstream configurations, requiring manual updates. These are the main pain points we encountered, particularly with UI/UX, integration speed, and the usability of certain inbuilt playbooks.
MD
Software Engineer III at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Task persistence and integration ease have been key benefits
The best part of Swimlane is the persistent notifications and its ease of integration, requiring minimal coding. While it lacks response features, it can be integrated with messaging or queue services to achieve this. Any incident response requires additional integration since Swimlane itself doesn't react to incidents. Real-time data in terms of persistence is configurable, and without config, tasks persist indefinitely until completion. If using Appian versions below 11, integration features for Swimlane aren't available. By default, Swimlane lacks built-in intelligence, needing coding for integration. Although the Swimlane is beneficial and reduces manpower requirements, it's hindered by its lack of exposure. If exposed through services or endpoints, its functionality could be accessed without needing a local standalone application. On a scale of one to ten, this solution deserves a rating of nine.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"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."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Since we started working with Torq, I am handling much fewer alerts, it is becoming really easy for me to handle an alert, I have all the information that I need, I do not need to connect to different vendors to receive this information, and the main thing I got from Torq is time, which now helps me to build another automated system and learn."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"From the security team's standpoint, the solution has improved our organization's overall cybersecurity."
"Palo Alto is easy to use."
"Its agility and scalability are valuable."
"We've had a very positive experience."
"The product’s stability is good."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR has had a positive impact on the mean time to resolution for incidents (MTTR), as it has significantly reduced noise."
"The product can automate security tasks."
"The most valuable features are the orchestration because of the way in which it coordinates the loss from all the devices and it provides us with a high-level overview of the critical log information."
"Our primary goal was to reduce analyst time, and we have been successful in that."
"Swimlane saves us 80 to 90 percent of our time by quickly helping us design the journey and efficiently passing information to various components."
"Swimlane is a very effective way to represent workflows involving multiple users."
"The biggest advantage of Swimlane for us is that it saves time, which in turn helps us in cost-saving."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the support."
"The technical support from Swimlane is very good."
"Swimlane enables two SOC analysts to work efficiently as much as ten analysts would without Swimlane, which translates to significant manpower savings."
"It provides us with a single portal for our logs from different solutions."
 

Cons

"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."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"It was able to capture data but was unable to differentiate between the agent hostname we are using and the hostname that resides on the back end of the Internet."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"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."
"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."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"The price of the solution could be improved."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the Panorama feature. We had to turn it off because it was not working properly."
"The solution requires DV but does not support open-source DV elastic searches."
"The formats are not compatible, are readily not available, and are not readable."
"The integration could be better. Cortex, for example, does not work with iPhone."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"It doesn't offer automatic internet reports out of the box."
"The solution should be made a bit cheaper."
"There is a need for enhanced version control in Swimlane. Currently, our version does not support it, making it tough to move changes between environments during significant updates."
"Swimlane's search bar is not working effectively, and there is no option to differentiate between two cases at the same time."
"Swimlane is not scalable because it is not exposed. Currently, it's a manual component that requires configuration through coding."
"The stability of the solution has room for improvement."
"I would prefer to have more colors added to represent different risks or notations, which can be used for the prioritization of risks and the significance of information."
"I would like to see improvements in the minor bugs that occur with each update, as some features might have issues."
"The initial setup and deployment are complex."
"The initial setup and deployment are complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price, I rate the pricing a nine."
"It is expensive."
"It is approx $10,000 or $20,000 per year for two user licenses."
"It's cheaper compared to its competitors."
"There is a perception that it is priced very high compared to other solutions."
"When I first looked at Demisto, it had a price tag of $250,000 but when we finally purchased it, it was $345,000."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is comparable to other solutions in the market."
"There is a yearly license required for this solution and it is expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
896,387 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise26
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
To improve alert handling capability, there are ready-to-use playbooks available, but there are very few. Torq should...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
Torq is primarily used for security operations, mainly for the SOC team. I develop use cases based on requirements fr...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
The maintenance side is very good because we are using the product to reduce activities. For instance, sometimes ther...
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 ze...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
Regarding areas for improvement in Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, I want to highlight one concern about playbook cr...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
My primary use cases for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are malware incidents, specifically phishing-related inciden...
What needs improvement with Swimlane?
One of the disadvantages of Swimlane is that to manage the platform, we need hardcore developers. We have recently se...
What is your primary use case for Swimlane?
We are using Swimlane for automation purposes and security orchestration. We are using Swimlane's Playbook Automation...
What advice do you have for others considering Swimlane?
I would rate Swimlane a seven out of ten as a product.
 

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
LinkedIn, TransUnion, Citrix, Aetna, Perspecta
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs. Swimlane and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,387 professionals have used our research since 2012.