In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks could be improved or enhanced in various ways. I don't have an idea about that yet because for that you actually need to use two or three different other tools to make a basic comparison. If you ask me how good the tool is, I would fairly rate it quite high. The tool is very popular, and customers can already see that it is one of the cloud leaders in the security space. The platform had a very good feature which provides documentation links about how to use a specific feature on the UI. It takes you to the proper documentation page where it suggests what to do and tells you about the steps that need to be done for a resource deployment. My thoughts about improving the product which I believe could greatly aid vendors is that it used to be a very user-friendly tool, but now they have incorporated everything under one umbrella. It has XDR, XSOAR, and Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. Before, we used to have separate modules and separate environments for each of these capabilities or features. Right now, it is a little complex and users would take their own time to know the tool better. This is something that would have been way better, but I would say there would be different opinions on this. Talking about user-friendliness, it has decreased now.
Cloud Security Manager at T-Systems International GmbH
Real User
Top 5
Mar 17, 2026
It is difficult to measure how Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks can be improved. I have some colleagues from Palo Alto because they are acquiring strategic companies such as Chronosphere for observability and agent-based AI security. Palo Alto has bought CyberArk, a major company for identity management. Perhaps connecting CyberArk and creating features to manage cloud identities with CyberArk could be beneficial.
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.
Learn what your peers think about Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2026.
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.
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks enhances cloud security with features like AI/ML threat detection and automated remediation, ensuring real-time protection and efficient management across cloud environments.Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks offers comprehensive cloud security posture management and runtime protection. It reduces manual tasks and accelerates incident investigation through advanced threat detection and AI-driven anomaly detection. With integration to the MITRE ATT&CK...
In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks could be improved or enhanced in various ways. I don't have an idea about that yet because for that you actually need to use two or three different other tools to make a basic comparison. If you ask me how good the tool is, I would fairly rate it quite high. The tool is very popular, and customers can already see that it is one of the cloud leaders in the security space. The platform had a very good feature which provides documentation links about how to use a specific feature on the UI. It takes you to the proper documentation page where it suggests what to do and tells you about the steps that need to be done for a resource deployment. My thoughts about improving the product which I believe could greatly aid vendors is that it used to be a very user-friendly tool, but now they have incorporated everything under one umbrella. It has XDR, XSOAR, and Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. Before, we used to have separate modules and separate environments for each of these capabilities or features. Right now, it is a little complex and users would take their own time to know the tool better. This is something that would have been way better, but I would say there would be different opinions on this. Talking about user-friendliness, it has decreased now.
It is difficult to measure how Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks can be improved. I have some colleagues from Palo Alto because they are acquiring strategic companies such as Chronosphere for observability and agent-based AI security. Palo Alto has bought CyberArk, a major company for identity management. Perhaps connecting CyberArk and creating features to manage cloud identities with CyberArk could be beneficial.
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.