Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs ThreatQ comparison

 

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

Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (2nd)
ThreatQ
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
22nd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is 9.6%, down from 11.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatQ is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR9.6%
ThreatQ1.2%
Other89.2%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

DayaramGoyal - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers automation but requires enhancements for intuitive configuration
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is a good product with enhanced and efficient playbooks, as demonstrated during our use case simulations. We have implemented automation features, such as automated responses to email threats and automatic configuration of target devices for blocking specific IPs. The analytics feature in Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is impressive. The solution is quite exhaustive regarding integrations, with many pre-integrations available, especially for market-leading products. There might be challenges with make-in-India products, as they tend not to build the necessary connectors. This depends on whether you are selling to enterprises or other customers. For government customers, you might encounter many Indian products, such as firewalls, which could pose integration challenges unless you have open APIs. However, for market-leading products, there are ready-made integrations available.
Yasir Akram - PeerSpot reviewer
Good reporting and pretty stable but needs to be simpler to use
The support team of ThreatQ set up a VM on our VPN, which was SlashNext's private VPN. Then we just initiated some system calls and ThreatQ provided us the configuration file with our settings (like our email, our API key, our URL, our category, etc.). They set up a VM on our private VPN cloud. And then they provided us the configuration file in which we just entered our details like our company URL, our API category, and API keys et cetera. We could just add it on the configuration file. We just uploaded it to the ThreatQ server. After running the system calls, we just initiated the ThreatQ and then performed tasks on the UI, such as categorizing the reports. If we only wanted the report for phishing, then we just manipulated the data on the UI and just extracted the reports. That's all. The deployment was complex. We used high hardware specifications. I don't remember the exact specifications, however, I recall them being high. There were some services that had some compatibility errors. That's why we had our VMs - to make sure that the customer would not face any errors. Everything's deployed with high specifications and custom specifications. That was the biggest challenge for us - to deploy on the customer VMs. On average, deployment takes 15-20 minutes if it's deployed without any errors. I was with one of the NetOps network admin during deployment. We were only two people and we just deployed and installed all services and we executed the deployment.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What I like most about Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is how user-friendly it is for development. It is much simpler to work with compared to similar tools I've used."
"The solution is easy to deploy."
"The automation part and the playbook creation part are awesome. The way it is responding to the customers and incidents is also very good. In the SOC environment, I guess it will carry out around 50% of the work."
"It has an extensive list of integrations that are available out of the box which makes it easy to start."
"The drag-and-drop interface enables analysts with no programming knowledge to create playbooks easily."
"The solution provides threat intelligence with EDR."
"It was useful as a ticketing tool."
"It’s easy to install."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
"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."
 

Cons

"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR lacks to offer SIEM functionalities currently."
"The solution is complicated to learn."
"Its dashboard features need improvement."
"The solution is very expensive."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"The price of the solution could be lower."
"The solution requires DV but does not support open-source DV elastic searches."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price, I rate the pricing a nine."
"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."
"The solution is based on an annual licensing model that is expensive."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is expensive."
"The solution's cost is reasonable."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution's pricing needs improvement."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Educational Organization
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise24
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 zero versus $20 million, which is why they have to make a decision.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
To improve the solution, it needs to have complete features that are low-code, no-code, and should be plug-and-play. We need to see improvements in that area to facilitate cyber analysts.
What do you like most about ThreatQ?
Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy.
What needs improvement with ThreatQ?
The tool is not user-friendly. It is not beginner-friendly. It would be very difficult for a beginner to learn the tool. It will take at least two months to get familiar with it. Building the playb...
What is your primary use case for ThreatQ?
We used the solution for threat mapping and managing IoCs.
 

Also Known As

Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cellcom Israel, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, esri, Cylance, Flatiron Health, Veeva, ADT Cybersecurity
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.