We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and ThreatQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks, Splunk and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)."Sentinel has an intuitive, user-friendly way to visualize the data properly. It gives me a solid overview of all the logs. We get a more detailed view that I can't get from the other SIEM tools. It has some IP and URL-specific allow listing"
"The best feature is that onboarding to the SIM solution is quite easy. If you are using cloud-based solutions, it's just a few clicks to migrate it."
"The solution has features that helped improve the security posture of our clients. It provides the ability to correlate a large variety of log sources very cost-effectively, especially for Microsoft sources."
"The in-built SOAR of Sentinel is valuable. Kusto Query Language is also valuable for the ease of writing queries and ease of getting insights from the logs. Schedule-based queries within Sentinel are also valuable. I found these three features most useful for my projects."
"The UI of Sentinel is very good and easy to use, even for beginners."
"If you know how to do KQL (kusto query language) queries, which are how you query the log data inside Sentinel, the information is pretty rich. You can get down to a good level of detail regarding event information or notifications."
"The log analysis is excellent; it can predict what can or will happen regarding use patterns and vulnerabilities."
"The AI capability is one of the main features of the solution because I believe that in the market, there are few solutions that are providing security solutions based on AI and machine learning."
"The product is quite easy to use."
"They have a portal where you can find any kind of integration that you need."
"The solution provides threat intelligence with EDR."
"The strengths of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR stem from the fact that it provides functionalities related to patching and URL blocking...It is a scalable solution."
"I am satisfied with the product overall."
"It was useful as a ticketing tool."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are the remote controller from the workstation that can execute commands and isolate the systems outside of the network. Only the system with an internet connection can execute the task because the main console is in the cloud."
"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."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
"The interface could be more user-friendly. It''s a small improvement that they could make if they wanted to."
"Microsoft Defender has a built-in threat expert option that enables you to contact an expert. That feature isn't available in Sentinel because it's a huge product that integrates all the technologies. I would like Microsoft to add the threat expert option so we can contact them. There are a few other features, like threat assessment that the PG team is working on. I expect them to release this feature in the next quarter."
"They can work on the EDR side of things... Every time we need to onboard these kinds of machines into the EDR, we need to do it with the help of Intune, to sync up the devices, and do the configuration. I'm looking for something on the EDR side that will reduce this kind of work."
"The built-in SOAR is not really good out-of-the-box. The SOAR relies on logic apps and you almost need to have some kind of developer background to be able to make these logic apps. Most security people cannot develop anything..."
"If Sentinel had a graphical user interface, it would be easier to use. I would also like it to be more customizable."
"The playbook is a bit difficult and could be improved."
"I would like to be able to monitor applications outside of the Azure Cloud."
"When it comes to ingesting Azure native log sources, some of the log sources are specific to the subscription, and it is not always very clear."
"For building automation, there is not a lot of good documentation. The documentation is there, but it is not very good from my perspective. There should be an improvement in this area. I don't see issues with anything else. In terms of new features, I have heard that other products have EBA functionality. It would be good if this functionality could be added."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the look, feel, and management of the cloud console. Additionally, the user could be more easily integrated."
"When Palo Alto bought the solution, the pricing increased by 1.5 times. There's been a 50% increase, which is a lot."
"The solution should be made a bit cheaper."
"XSOAR could have more integration options."
"With Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, managing its setup phase can be a complicated task."
"Corex XSOAR could be improved by reducing the time it takes to process large amounts of data and increasing the number of integrations."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 41 reviews while ThreatQ is ranked 25th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 2 reviews. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4, while ThreatQ is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR writes "Enables the investigators to go through the review process a lot quicker". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatQ writes "Improves the threat intelligence gathering process, but it is not user-friendly". Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Fortinet FortiSOAR, Swimlane and IBM Resilient, whereas ThreatQ is most compared with ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP), Anomali ThreatStream, Recorded Future and CrowdStrike Falcon.
See our list of best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) vendors.
We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) 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.
