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

ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) vs Cortex XSIAM comparison

 

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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
8.9
ArcSight ESM can offer high ROI through threat detection, compliance, audits, and brand protection despite its costs and implementation challenges.
Sentiment score
5.4
Cortex XSIAM offers significant ROI and reduced staffing needs, though some businesses await full financial assessments.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.7
ArcSight ESM customer service is mixed, with efficient initial responses but inconsistent, often slow technical support causing dissatisfaction.
Sentiment score
6.9
Cortex XSIAM customer support varies, with mixed reviews ranging from inadequate responses to helpful, efficient resolutions across different tiers.
If I raise a P1 or P0 ticket, the response time is often delayed by four to eight hours.
It is ineffective in terms of responding to basic queries and addressing future requirements.
The Palo Alto support team is fully responsive and helpful.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
ArcSight ESM offers scalability and cloud support but faces high costs and EPS licensing challenges for growing event volumes.
Sentiment score
7.3
Cortex XSIAM scales easily for enterprises, rated highly for scalability, despite integration reliance concerns, supporting numerous assets and users.
It lacks some capabilities compared to other tools available in the market.
Without proper integration, scaling up with more servers is meaningless.
Cortex XSIAM is highly scalable.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
ArcSight ESM is stable with configuration efforts, though deployment challenges and occasional issues arise under high-load conditions.
Sentiment score
8.2
Cortex XSIAM is highly stable, cloud-based, and dependable, with minimal downtime, excellent reliability ratings, and rare intervention needs.
The stability of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is not very robust.
The product was easy to install and set up and worked right.
Overall, Cortex XSIAM is stable.
 

Room For Improvement

ArcSight ESM needs interface updates, better integration, improved performance, reporting, scaling, error handling, and enhanced technical support.
Cortex XSIAM needs improvements in integration, performance, usability, and support services, with enhanced automation and developer-friendliness.
The integration aspect of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) needs improvement.
Obtaining validation for integrations from Palo Alto takes around eight months, which is quite long.
Cortex XSIAM needs improvements in terms of data onboarding, parsers, and third-party integration supports.
Cortex could improve the detection and online resolution of security vulnerabilities.
 

Setup Cost

ArcSight ESM is costly but justifiable, with pricing based on EPS, scalable features, and possible bulk discounts.
Cortex XSIAM is competitively priced compared to Splunk and Microsoft Sentinel but involves complex licensing and additional costs.
ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is very cheap compared to other tools.
The licensing cost of Cortex XSIAM is more or less the same as Splunk, making it quite expensive compared to other tools.
Cortex XSIAM is pretty expensive, and the licensing process is not very comfortable.
The product is very expensive.
 

Valuable Features

ArcSight ESM offers seamless integration, scalability, customizable features, real-time monitoring, and extensive analytics for effective threat detection and response.
Cortex XSIAM provides advanced threat detection with machine learning, seamless third-party integration, and comprehensive network and endpoint protection.
The ability to interpret data is highly valued.
Cortex XSIAM is able to detect abnormal behavior of malicious code and subsequently block it.
The flexibility for creating manual workflows stands out.
Its signature-less subscriptions and robust detection power stand out in improving threat detection.
 

Categories and Ranking

ArcSight Enterprise Securit...
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cortex XSIAM
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
17th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (6th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is 1.1%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cortex XSIAM is 2.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

Ramnesh  Dubey - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows for monitoring logs according to industry standards within ESM but has a total capacity capped at 12 TB, limiting real-time data retention periods
The first limitation is with the ArcSight Data Storage Manager (ADSM). ArcSight's total capacity is currently capped at 12 TB. This becomes an issue if a customer needs a longer real-time data retention period, such as exceeding 90 days or reaching a year or even ten months. Increasing the disk space beyond 12 TB is not currently possible. So, increasing the storage capacity is one area for improvement. Additionally, the real-time data retention is limited due to the 12 TB restriction. Depending on the Events Per Second (EPS) you receive, you might only be able to retain data for seven to ten days. Overall, the 12 TB limit is the main issue we face in terms of maximizing real-time data storage. Moreover, there are a few improvements I would like to see in future releases. My main suggestion for ArcSight is to simplify the deployment process. Currently, the installation process is quite complex. There are various components involved, including transformations, multiple installations, and containerization for various components. Ideally, I'd recommend that ArcSight allow the entire installation, including the ESM and database, to be completed within a single unified setup process for a streamlined experience. Additionally, having readily available and well-organized documentation for the step-by-step installation process would be incredibly helpful. I would also like to see better support.
AKASH MAJUMDER - PeerSpot reviewer
Incident response times have significantly reduced with efficient device integration and log parsing capabilities
Cortex XSIAM needs improvements in terms of data onboarding, parsers, and third-party integration supports. Additionally, a future update request is to enable tagging of endpoints in groups, similar to a feature available in Cortex XDR. The AI analytics need fine-tuning because some use cases are not working from my side.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
848,396 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Jun 28, 2015
Qradar vs. ArcSight
Continuing with the SIEM posts we have done at Infosecnirvana, this post is a Head to head comparison of the two Industry leading SIEM products in the market – HP ArcSight and IBM QRadar Both the products have consistently been in the Gartner Leaders Quadrant. Both HP and IBM took over niche SIEM…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the best SIEM tool for a mid-sized financial services firm: Arcsight or Securonix?
In my market, a lot of financial companies had or have an ArcSight installation. Just because in former times it was pretty good. Now a lot of them are looking for a more effective solution due to ...
What do you like most about ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM)?
We utilize ArcSight ESM for real-time threat detection in our organization. We have custom rules that we've developed on top of the WAN services, along with scheduled licensing activities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM)?
ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is very cheap compared to other tools. It is worth the investment if you are considering the cost.
What do you like most about Cortex XSIAM?
It is an effective solution in terms of performance and functionalities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex XSIAM?
Cortex XSIAM is pretty expensive, and the licensing process is not very comfortable. CrowdStrike licensing is easier and follows an annual recurring revenue model, unlike Cortex XSIAM.
What needs improvement with Cortex XSIAM?
Cortex XSIAM is pretty expensive, and the licensing process is not very comfortable compared to CrowdStrike. CrowdStrike offers an annual recurring revenue option that Cortex XSIAM does not provide.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ArcSight, HPE ArcSight, ArcSight
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lake Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bank AlJazira, Banca Intesa, and Obrela.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) vs. Cortex XSIAM and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,396 professionals have used our research since 2012.