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

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs Tines 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
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
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)
Tines
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
6th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (11th), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st), AI IT Support (10th)
 

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 Tines is 4.5%, down from 6.4% 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%
Tines4.5%
Other83.0%
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.
CC
Enterprise Security Architect V at FirstEnergy
Customization supports seamless workflow while data influx challenges response time
What I appreciate most about Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is that it is very open, even more so than Anomali. I can create various custom automations and custom fields. There is significant customization ability in this platform. If I already have an established process, I do not have to change my process to fit into the tool. I can modify the tool to fit into my process, which makes things considerably easier. All of our alerts from different tools come into this central place as we have multiple SIEMs. We have items coming from Anomali and other platforms that are not SIEM tools. This serves as our central location where our SOC analysts can work and determine if incident response is needed. The platform provides data enrichment capabilities, offering information upfront so analysts do not have to search for it. They can access details such as username, phone number, email address, and workplace information. For malware files, they can retrieve details from VirusTotal, including file names and environment presence. We have built substantial automation around these features, which also helps us track case metrics, investigation time, and threat mitigation duration.
MI
Cyber Security Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Automation has transformed alert triage and now powers AI-driven security operations
There are three things that I would say could be better. The first is the Change Control UI. I have noticed that the UI for Change Control is a bit difficult to navigate and assess, but I know that Tines is working on that and so hopefully we will see results soon. The second thing is the action called Implode. The issue with the Implode action is that once we get a certain number of events into the Implode action, we lose context of all the events except the last one that came in, so it is a bit difficult to send data back once it goes through the Implode action. I have raised this up with Tines, but I do not know if they are working on this or not. The third thing is the capacity to debug. If my story is not attached to a case, it is a bit difficult to debug if I run into an error. I have to identify the exact event that caused the error and then start debugging from there, so that is not entirely user-friendly. These are the three downfalls that I have noticed with Tines.

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 helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"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."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"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 most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are its overall track record and features that fit our use case."
"It was useful as a ticketing tool."
"The solution provides threat intelligence with EDR."
"Many different playbooks are available and can be customized."
"From the security team's standpoint, the solution has improved our organization's overall cybersecurity."
"The repository of playbooks and the integration between Palo Alto and IBM QRadar are some useful features"
"It was useful as a ticketing tool."
"For an analyst, it would take at least one hour to two hours to get the result with this much perfection, but with Tines, it happens instantaneously."
"The tool was vendor-neutral."
"One of the most valuable features is that it’s a low-code solution."
"The best thing is that it's no code, so it doesn't require coding knowledge."
"The best advantage is the no-code automation, excellent customer support services, and ease of integration with other tools."
 

Cons

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"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."
"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."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"The solution should be made a bit cheaper."
"The licensing is paid on a yearly basis. It is quite expensive."
"It doesn't offer automatic internet reports out of the box."
"In terms of improvement, it needs to be more modular. It's not. When you're working in layouts and you create specific apps within layouts, there's no portability right now in order to reuse that code across multiple layouts. I can't take a tab and say I want to use this tab on these other layouts. I have to physically go in there and recreate it from scratch, which is maddening."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"One of the significant issues we encounter is system slowdown when we receive an influx of alerts, which inhibits how quickly we can access the information needed for investigation."
"The solution is complicated to learn."
"There are three things that I would say could be better."
"Maybe Tines can add more features and demonstrations, like videos on how to use the features within the tool."
"Tines was a little bit more expensive than Torq."
"They started implementing some AI, and their AI is isolated."
"Reporting and dashboards could be more advanced for deeper analysis."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution's cost is high."
"The solution's pricing needs improvement."
"From the cost perspective, I have heard that its price is a bit high as compared to other similar products."
"The solution is a bit on the expensive side."
"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."
"It is expensive."
"It is approx $10,000 or $20,000 per year for two user licenses."
"Palo Alto offers significant discounts to customers who purchase the products repeatedly."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise26
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
This is exactly what we discussed two days ago with the Torq team. We told them where we want to see improvements. Fo...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
I use Torq as my case management and alert system. Working as a SOC analyst, the first thing I do every morning is ge...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would definitely recommend Torq. I have no doubt, really. When we looked for another vendor, Torq really answered a...
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 Tines?
There are three things that I would say could be better. The first is the Change Control UI. I have noticed that the ...
What is your primary use case for Tines?
In the cybersecurity engineering and security automation field, we use Tines to automate the enrichment and analysis ...
What advice do you have for others considering Tines?
We are not in control of the deployment anymore. Initially we were using an S3 bucket to deploy Tines, but now Tines ...
 

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
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs. Tines and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.