We performed a comparison between IBM Resilient and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Sentinel has features that have helped improve our security poster. It helped us in going ahead and identifying the gaps via analysis and focusing on the key elements."
"The most valuable features in my experience are the UEBA, LDAP, the threat scheduler, and integration with third-party straight perform like the MISP."
"The main benefit is the ease of integration."
"There are a lot of things you can explore as a user. You can even go and actively hunt for threats. You can go on the offensive rather than on the defensive."
"The features that stand out are the detection engine and its integration with multiple data sources."
"It's easy to use. It's a very good product. It can easily ingest data from anywhere. It has an easily understandable language to perform actions."
"The dashboard that allows me to view all the incidents is the most valuable feature."
"The log query feature has been the most valuable because it's very good. You can put your data on the cloud and run queues from Sentinel. It will do it all very fast. I love that I don't have to upload it to an Excel file and then manually look for a piece of information. Sentinel is much faster and is good for big databases."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The UBA, User Behavior Analytics, is very good."
"It's really simple and has a flexible interface."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The product is very good at incident response."
"As a whole, the product is stable...Technical support is very good."
"The solution is simple to use and to integrate with IBM QRadar."
"The most valuable features of IBM Resilient are its flexibility and customization options for incident response."
"I have found the solution very useful, it integrates well with other platforms."
"The most valuable features are simplicity and ease of integration."
"The Palo Alto ecosystem has a marketplace offering integration with Sentinel or other products."
"Cortex XSOAR's most valuable features are the playbooks, custom integration, the machine-learning model, and the layout, classifier, and mapper."
"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 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."
"Many different playbooks are available and can be customized."
"Palo Alto is easy to use."
"The following would be a challenge for any product in the market, but we have some in-house apps in our environment... our apps were built with different parameters and the APIs for them are not present in Sentinel. We are working with Microsoft to build those custom APIs that we require. That is currently in progress."
"Sometimes, we are observing large ingestion delays. We expect logs within 5 minutes, but it takes about 10 to 15 minutes."
"There is a wider thing called Jupyter Notebooks, which is around the automation side of things. It would be good if there are playbooks that you can utilize without having to have the developer experience to do it in-house. Microsoft could provide more playbooks or more Jupyter Notebooks around MITRE ATT&CK Framework."
"The solution could improve the playbooks."
"We'd like also a better ticketing system, which is older."
"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."
"The performance could be improved. If I create 15 to 20 lines for a single-use case in KQL, sometimes it takes more time to execute. If I create use cases within a certain timeline, the result will show in .01 seconds. A complex query takes more time to get results."
"They could use some kind of workbook. There is some limitation doing the editing and creating the workbook."
"The response time of the support is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The tool needs to improve its documentation on license scripts."
"What could make IBM Resilient better is if IBM increased the number of built-in integrations with different products from other vendors or third-party products."
"The initial setup is complex."
"IBM Resilient could integrate better with my tools."
"The implementation could be a bit simpler."
"This product could be improved with better customization. This product isn't the best on the market like QRadar, but it's actually a good solution. However, some competitors' solutions contain more integration, support, automation, or flexibility."
"One thing to improve is how it handles data formats, which currently might require scripting for conversion to CSV before uploading."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"The integration could be better. Cortex, for example, does not work with iPhone."
"I would love to see more flexibility on what we can display and design on the dashboards."
"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."
"When Palo Alto bought the solution, the pricing increased by 1.5 times. There's been a 50% increase, which is a lot."
"It is not a very scalable solution."
"The solution is very expensive."
"XSOAR could have more integration options."
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Resilient is ranked 7th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 17 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 42 reviews. IBM Resilient is rated 7.6, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Resilient writes "Simple deployment, scalable, but lacking third-party solution compatibility ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR writes "Enables the investigators to go through the review process a lot quicker". IBM Resilient is most compared with Splunk SOAR, ServiceNow Security Operations, IBM Security QRadar, Fortinet FortiSOAR and IBM Cloud Pak for Security, whereas Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Fortinet FortiSOAR, Swimlane and Tines. See our IBM Resilient vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR report.
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.
