As per my experience with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, the UI could be simpler. There are few features which are very hidden, such as those in software bill of materials and compliance policies. Palo Alto Networks could make the UI a bit easier to navigate. Apart from this, all other things are good. Detection and response features are good, and the visibility, especially in the CI/CD pipeline, is also very good. Infrastructure as Code visibility is good. I don't think there is much scope of improvement regarding detection and response. However, they can improve operational efficiency and the UI. I feel that some features which are hidden could be shown on the home page or front page, which would make a significant difference.
Business Development Manager For Palo Alto Networks at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Reseller
Top 20
Feb 7, 2026
From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market. Additionally, there is not a clear MSP model compared to other vendors such as CrowdStrike. These are significant limitations, especially today when managed services are becoming increasingly important for end users. Palo Alto decided to limit some functionalities because they want to stress more on Cortex XSIAM. I do not agree with this strategy because Cortex XSIAM is a completely different market compared to Cortex XDR. This is the main issue of Cortex—the commercial model Palo Alto is implementing. The product is very good; the problem is the commercial model. There are probably some areas for improvement because Palo Alto is growing too much. Today the challenge is to have skilled people, which I believe is the same issue everywhere. I do not agree with this decision.
Business Development Team Lead at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
Reseller
Top 20
Feb 3, 2026
The negative aspects or areas for improvement in the product include the fact that the cost might be a bit high, which challenges commercials, but not technically. The areas I think could be improved in this product include some possibilities, but I cannot specify exactly what could be improved.
Regarding areas for improvement, the tool performs its functions well, but frequent name changes across Palo Alto Networks products can be frustrating for technical teams who must continually adapt. Furthermore, the solution is quite premium in cost compared to alternatives such as Wiz, and I miss the identity-based micro-segmentation feature that was previously available. I would rate Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks a seven out of ten; the pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions. The absence of identity-based micro-segmentation is disappointing, and there is room for improvement in behavioral analytics and anomaly detection.
There are areas that could be improved from Palo Alto's side. I think that we need to start using the AI module because it is the new offering, but I do not have specific suggestions. The support that we receive is appropriate, and I do not have additional comments.
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent. They changed the names of the products and are now clarifying their offer. The family of the products is not easy to follow because it's very recent. Regarding the generative AI security tool, I know for sure it's Agentic. Based on my experience with Palo Alto, I can suggest what Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks could make better or what additional functions could be added. This is the best tool in the market. It's not the time to tell what they could do better because it's a recent tool. The market is now adopting it. Our experience doesn't show that they need to do more.
Learn what your peers think about Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2026.
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks provides comprehensive cybersecurity management, focusing on enhancing security operations with advanced automation and threat intelligence, addressing complex security challenges efficiently.
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks integrates cloud-scale data analytics and automation to streamline security operations, enabling faster threat detection and response. It leverages AI and machine learning to provide real-time threat intelligence and automate routine...
As per my experience with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, the UI could be simpler. There are few features which are very hidden, such as those in software bill of materials and compliance policies. Palo Alto Networks could make the UI a bit easier to navigate. Apart from this, all other things are good. Detection and response features are good, and the visibility, especially in the CI/CD pipeline, is also very good. Infrastructure as Code visibility is good. I don't think there is much scope of improvement regarding detection and response. However, they can improve operational efficiency and the UI. I feel that some features which are hidden could be shown on the home page or front page, which would make a significant difference.
From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market. Additionally, there is not a clear MSP model compared to other vendors such as CrowdStrike. These are significant limitations, especially today when managed services are becoming increasingly important for end users. Palo Alto decided to limit some functionalities because they want to stress more on Cortex XSIAM. I do not agree with this strategy because Cortex XSIAM is a completely different market compared to Cortex XDR. This is the main issue of Cortex—the commercial model Palo Alto is implementing. The product is very good; the problem is the commercial model. There are probably some areas for improvement because Palo Alto is growing too much. Today the challenge is to have skilled people, which I believe is the same issue everywhere. I do not agree with this decision.
The negative aspects or areas for improvement in the product include the fact that the cost might be a bit high, which challenges commercials, but not technically. The areas I think could be improved in this product include some possibilities, but I cannot specify exactly what could be improved.
Regarding areas for improvement, the tool performs its functions well, but frequent name changes across Palo Alto Networks products can be frustrating for technical teams who must continually adapt. Furthermore, the solution is quite premium in cost compared to alternatives such as Wiz, and I miss the identity-based micro-segmentation feature that was previously available. I would rate Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks a seven out of ten; the pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions. The absence of identity-based micro-segmentation is disappointing, and there is room for improvement in behavioral analytics and anomaly detection.
There are areas that could be improved from Palo Alto's side. I think that we need to start using the AI module because it is the new offering, but I do not have specific suggestions. The support that we receive is appropriate, and I do not have additional comments.
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent. They changed the names of the products and are now clarifying their offer. The family of the products is not easy to follow because it's very recent. Regarding the generative AI security tool, I know for sure it's Agentic. Based on my experience with Palo Alto, I can suggest what Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks could make better or what additional functions could be added. This is the best tool in the market. It's not the time to tell what they could do better because it's a recent tool. The market is now adopting it. Our experience doesn't show that they need to do more.
Some aspects of the GUI can be confusing and make it difficult for me to find certain options or navigate where needed.