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
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
10
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

Nimrod Vardi - PeerSpot reviewer
Global IT Director at OpenWeb
Automation workflows have transformed our IT, enabling secure just-in-time access control
We work with them quite often, so we have a direct line regarding areas in Torq that have room for improvement. If we have a feature request, we can request it. I do not have anything in mind at the moment. We were a design partner for a short while, so we feel that they listen and that users of the system have an impact on the way the system is designed for the better. They have a new community, which is something that I personally suggested years ago. There are many people like me in different places and they might have already built the workflow that I need. Having the option to share workflows or to jump on a thread and say I have this need, did anyone ever build a workflow for it, is amazing. Someone would jump in and say yes, sure, here, take this workflow. I think this is an amazing thing and I really hope that the community will come alive because I think this is really powerful. This is something that I already suggested and it did happen eventually, and I am quite happy with it. I do not have any specific feature in mind that I have a need for at the moment.
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

"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."
"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."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"Under one SOC tool in Torq, analysts get to know everything within the context of an alert or incident they are working on, and this ability to view the whole picture within Torq is one of the major breakthroughs and best offerings of Torq."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"The most valuable features are simplicity and ease of integration."
"The automation part and the playbook creation part are awesome. The way it is responding to the customers and incidents is also very good. In the SOC environment, I guess it will carry out around 50% of the work."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Palo Alto has reduced the time that it takes to go through the process of investigating a reported abuse."
"The most valuable feature is automation."
"It was useful as a ticketing tool."
"Palo Alto has gotten the investigators more presence to actually go in the report because being that the platform will email the investigator that it's been assigned to, now the investigators will jump in there and start going through the review process a lot quicker."
"The product can automate security tasks."
"It provides us with a single portal for our logs from different solutions."
"Our primary goal was to reduce analyst time, and we have been successful in that."
"On a scale of one to ten, this solution deserves a rating of nine."
"The biggest advantage of Swimlane for us is that it saves time, which in turn helps us in cost-saving."
"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 enables two SOC analysts to work efficiently as much as ten analysts would without Swimlane, which translates to significant manpower savings."
"Swimlane is a very effective way to represent workflows involving multiple users."
"The technical support from Swimlane is very good."
 

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."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"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."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"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."
"The solution is not a Palo Alto product so technical support is inadequate."
"Previously, when Demisto was, there was a community edition; we could use it, reinstall it, and customize it. Since Palo Alto took over, it has become more financially oriented. It's business, but they could offer a pro model and a lighter model for different needs."
"It's only one cloud right now. It might be helpful for some companies to have an on-premies option."
"The solution requires DV but does not support open-source DV elastic searches."
"The price of the solution could be lower."
"The configuration of the solution could improve it is difficult."
"There should be an on-premise version available for customers to have different choices."
"The solution’s price and technical support could be improved."
"I would like to see improvements in the minor bugs that occur with each update, as some features might have issues."
"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."
"The stability of the solution has room for improvement."
"One of the disadvantages of Swimlane is that to manage the platform, we need hardcore developers."
"Swimlane's search bar is not working effectively, and there is no option to differentiate between two cases at the same time."
"The initial setup and deployment are complex."
"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 is not scalable because it is not exposed. Currently, it's a manual component that requires configuration through coding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution's cost is high."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is comparable to other solutions in the market."
"It is expensive."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is expensive."
"It's cheaper compared to its competitors."
"Palo Alto offers significant discounts to customers who purchase the products repeatedly."
"The pricing is fair. The pricing reflects the value and feature set it offers."
"When I first looked at Demisto, it had a price tag of $250,000 but when we finally purchased it, it was $345,000."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
896,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
9%
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.
896,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.