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

Galvanize IncidentBond [EOL] vs Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Galvanize IncidentBond [EOL]
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (2nd), SOC as a Service (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

DE
Information Security Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Customization and transparency of data, while maintaining a mostly user-friendly UI
Sadly, I can’t provide specific examples due to the nature of the content of the improvements. I will say that, prior to implementation, and post-implementation, we saw a nearly 800% increase in volume of completed and correctly completed documentation in regards to specific tasks being completed. Rsam puts the workflow first, and lets the record follow it. It literally puts a task on rails and the person needing to do the work only need respond to the prompts accordingly and let Rsam automate the rest. The data is cleaner, more uniform, and there’s simply more of it created more quickly, as a result.
EricRise - PeerSpot reviewer
Noc Network Engineer at a outsourcing company with 51-200 employees
Automation playbooks have reduced soc noise and now streamline daily incident response
To improve Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, there can be a learning curve to it. It is not a very user-friendly product; it is complex. It handles debugs and automation playbooks. You have to really spend some time dedicated to learning the product, scripting, and acquiring your certifications on it. Cost is another item as well. That can be quite significant; it does depend on other tools for EDR, whether you are using Palo Alto's XDR system or any number of third-party products for that. There are some reporting and logging restrictions and limitations. Some of those are going to be constraints, including window size limits. Database use with it has limited scalability for that type of application.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The customization and the transparency of data while still maintaining a mostly user-friendly UI, are key features. It allows for me, as an engineer, to evolve the individual components and modules, and to create a much more meaningful picture than the individual pieces in isolation ever could."
"Rsam puts the workflow first, and lets the record follow it, literally putting a task on rails so the person needing to do the work only needs to respond to the prompts accordingly and let Rsam automate the rest."
"I chose Cortex XSOAR because the client also has Palo Alto firewalls. I can incorporate the data from the Palo Alto firewalls into Cortex and send it into the same data lake to manipulate that data. It lets me manage and monitor the data in one place."
"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."
"Its agility and scalability are valuable."
"The repository of playbooks and the integration between Palo Alto and IBM QRadar are some useful features"
"Many different playbooks are available and can be customized."
"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 of Cortex XSOAR include its vast library of plugins, which allow us to integrate various tools and solutions seamlessly."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is a good product with enhanced and efficient playbooks, as demonstrated during our use case simulations."
 

Cons

"Hands down, if Rsam adopted a more industry proper "End of life – Deprecated – Stable – Release – Experimental" system with their releases, and all the proper checks and balances, I’d be an incredibly happy individual."
"Stable – Release – Experimental" system with their releases, and all the proper checks and balances, I’d be an incredibly happy individual. I can appreciate the cause and affect, wherein the customization of the tool drives rapid release schedules, and the paradox that creates with the idea of stable releases. I’d also like more transparency about known bugs and issues."
"The solution requires DV but does not support open-source DV elastic searches."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"The solution is not a Palo Alto product so technical support is inadequate."
"To improve Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, there can be a learning curve to it. It is not a very user-friendly product; it is complex."
"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 is room for improvement in terms of the pricing model."
"It doesn't offer automatic internet reports out of the box."
"The solution's technical support could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"When I first looked at Demisto, it had a price tag of $250,000 but when we finally purchased it, it was $345,000."
"The solution's cost is reasonable."
"It's cheaper compared to its competitors."
"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."
"The solution's pricing needs improvement."
"It is expensive."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is comparable to other solutions in the market."
"There is a yearly license required for this solution and it is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Incident Response solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise33
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
We can quantify the reduction. It is more than sixty to seventy percent reduction in the MTTR, as per documents from Palo Alto, and with proper implementation, we can improve MTTR by up to sixty-fi...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
The negative aspect of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is the price; cost-wise, it is a bit higher. Other than enterprise clients, they might need to push their management to get additional approva...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
We are a partner for Palo Alto as a service provider. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is used as a SIEM solution or XDR-type solutions.
 

Also Known As

IncidentBond, Rsam SIRP, Rsam Incident Management, Rsam Security Incident Response Platform
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Cellcom Israel, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, esri, Cylance, Flatiron Health, Veeva, ADT Cybersecurity
Find out what your peers are saying about ServiceNow, Proofpoint, Broadcom and others in Security Incident Response. Updated: October 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.