We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar 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 also enables you to ingest data from your entire ecosystem and not just from the Microsoft ecosystem. It can receive data from third-party vendors' products such firewalls, network devices, and antivirus solutions. It's not only a Microsoft solution, it's for everything."
"Investigations are something really remarkable. We can drill down right to the raw logs by running different queries and getting those on the console itself."
"The AI and ML of Azure Sentinel are valuable. We can use machine learning models at the tenant level and within Office 365 and Microsoft stack. We don't need to depend upon any other connectors. It automatically provisions the native Microsoft products."
"I've worked on most of the top SIEM solutions, and Sentinel has an edge in most areas. For example, it has built-in SOAR capabilities, allowing you to run playbooks automatically. Other vendors typically offer SOAR as a separate licensed solution or module, but you get it free with Sentinel. In-depth incident integration is available out of the box."
"The solution offers a lot of data on events. It helps us create specific detection strategies."
"The main benefit is the ease of integration."
"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."
"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."
"IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics has easy architecture, has a good portfolio and integration."
"No doubt about it, the solution is extremely stable."
"I really like the feature we have with the logs, that if there are any credit card numbers being used, like a PII, you can just use rejects and you can mask it. This is a really good feature in QRadar."
"The scalability is awesome, because QRadar includes other solutions in the same console."
"The features that I have found most valuable in QRadar are its data enrichment, use case creations, and adding references - those kinds of features are very good. Also QRadar's event filtration and device integration are perfect."
"The event collector, flow collector, PCAP and SOAR are valuable."
"The monitoring and dashboards are great."
"We get events and make the correlation, or rules. In IBM, we can implement our customer's rules. We can have very clear status threats and severity of antigens."
"For organizations that are stable with their security operations, like those with around 50 members in their security team running full-phased operations 24/7, Cortex is necessary."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to configure."
"It is a scalable solution."
"I am satisfied with the product overall."
"It is a scalable solution. I would rate scalability a ten out of ten."
"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 feature is automation."
"The Palo Alto ecosystem has a marketplace offering integration with Sentinel or other products."
"It could have a better API to be able to automate many things more extensively and get more extensive data and more expensive deployment possibilities. It can gain some points on the automation part and the integration part. The API is very limited, and I would like to see it extended a bit more."
"At the network level, there is a limitation in integrating some of the switches or routers with Microsoft Sentinel. Currently, SPAN traffic monitoring is not available in Microsoft Sentinel. I have heard that it is available in Defender for Identity, which is a different product. It would be good if LAN traffic monitoring or SPAN traffic monitoring is available in Microsoft Sentinel. It would add a lot of value. It is available in some of the competitor products in the market."
"The AI capabilities must be improved."
"The data connectors for third-party tools could be improved, as some aren't available in Sentinel. They need to be available in the data connector panel."
"Microsoft should improve Sentinel, considering that from the legacy systems, it cannot collect logs."
"One key area that can be improved is by building a strong integration with our XDR platform."
"While I appreciate the UI itself and the vast amount of information available on the platform, I'm finding the overall user experience to be frustrating due to frequent disconnections and the requirement to repeatedly re-authenticate."
"They need to work with other security vendors. For example, we replaced our email gateway with Symantec, but we couldn't collect these logs with Azure Sentinel. Instead of collecting these logs with Azure Sentinel, we are collecting them on Qradar. We couldn't do it with Sentinel, which is a problem for us."
"The quoting and the dashboard session could be improved. It should be more user-friendly."
"The technical support can be improved a little bit, and the price could be cheaper."
"The biggest problem was built on top of the QRadar in the executive operations center network. The integration was not using the network security specialist properly, and all the incidents were inferior with QRadar. Its compatibility is not really good."
"The IBM support can be better."
"The pricing of the solution is a bit high. If they could lower it, that would be ideal."
"The whole process for support is something that needs to be improved."
"The price of IBM Security QRadar is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The product needs to improve its GUI."
"The solution's technical support could be better."
"Palo Alto needs to develop more AI-centric products."
"I would love to see more flexibility on what we can display and design on the dashboards."
"The solution should be made a bit cheaper."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the Panorama feature. We had to turn it off because it was not working properly."
"The dashboard could be better."
"There should be an on-premise version available for customers to have different choices."
"The configuration of the solution could improve it is difficult."
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 198 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 42 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". 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 Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Sentinel, whereas Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Fortinet FortiSOAR, Swimlane and IBM Resilient. See our IBM Security QRadar 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.