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

Cisco SecureX [EOL] vs Splunk SOAR 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco SecureX [EOL]
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.2
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Splunk SOAR
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
58
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

Alon K - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO & VP of Cyber Solutions, Israel at Rockwell Automation
Gives our customers visibility and they don't have to go multiple management consoles anymore
One of the examples is related to forensics. The forensics are amazing because when you have enrichment, and the solutions talk with each other, when you need it, you have the ability to know everything in the organization: when, why, whatever. With just one click you have information from email, from the endpoint, from the web. Let's say that tomorrow morning, you have a ransom[ware] attack in your organization and you would like to know from which email it came, or where the customer saved the file, even though the incident didn't occur at the same moment. With SecureX, you have Cisco Threat Response inside. [With] one click, you get all of the flow. That's amazing value. That also releases resources for our customers. The customers don't have to connect many systems and try to register the event on each system, or to go to the SIEM and do a correlation. That's the one-stop shop for the customers, and that's amazing.
SS
Manager cybersecurity at Hexion Inc.
Automates threat response and reduces investigation time but needs better threat intelligence integration
One thing that we would like to see with Splunk SOAR is the expandability to the threat intelligence feed. Currently, we have limited ingestion to the threat intelligence feed for the correlation purpose. We would like to see it being integrated, with license cost or without license cost, to leading threat intelligence sources such as Recorded Future, Feedly, or Flare. That is something we would appreciate having integrated. The second thing on the improvement side is about exposed credential-related information. If we start ingesting those data to Splunk SOAR or SIEM with some sort of integration with threat intelligence feed, that will also improve our detection and prediction method or help us with the investigation.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the most valuable features is the simplicity of deploying SecureX. It's very easy to do that and then you gain very detailed visibility into everything that's going on in your network and, obviously, at the device level. There's just a wealth of information that you can pull from all of these products that are part of SecureX. You know exactly if you have an issue or not."
"The ability to create firewalls online has been most valuable including the ability to create rules."
"SecureX enables us to have all the threat intelligence and threat event data in one place."
"We've reduced our workload by 20 to 30 percent just from being able to focus on the important things, as this product really does a lot of the grunt work for you."
"Using SecureX, a tool provided by Cisco, we can easily integrate it with many of our other Cisco products such as Cisco ISE and many networking devices."
"If management wants to ingest reports at a high level from all of the different products, they would only need one login to SecureX to view this information as opposed to separate logins for each of the integrated products."
"I like that I don't have to jump around to five different products and log into five different places to view the data that it returns."
"The most beneficial feature of Cisco SecureX for cybersecurity efforts is its integration with other Cisco solutions and the environment. This sets it apart, as its APIs and overall integration capabilities are very strong. Additionally, its detection capabilities are commendable."
"Splunk SOAR's quick response to incidents is the most valuable part."
"The most valuable feature is the risk-based access control."
"The customization continues to be excellent."
"Splunk integrates with so many products. It provides us with good information for us to be able to do our jobs."
"The features of Splunk SOAR that I appreciate most are the integrations with all the other applications and tools."
"Splunk SOAR has saved us a lot; monthly, around 300 hours of effort, it is saving with Splunk SOAR, and it has helped us where we were able to run the SOC operation with the less number of headcount versus what we used to do earlier."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the playbook automation just because it allows us to reduce the manual actions that SOC has to handle."
"Splunk SOAR allows us to connect to multiple platforms, whether they are networks, security, or observability."
 

Cons

"Enhancing automation capabilities could further improve the product."
"The automation and orchestration could be simpler. It could be that all the other parts are that easy to use so that these stick out as a negative, but that's the trickiest part for us. The workflows within the orchestration are just a bit more difficult."
"The playbooks provided with the product are great, although I would appreciate having more playbooks available. Threats are constantly evolving, so having access to updated playbooks is crucial."
"Remediation stuff could be integrated into the product's automation."
"They could expand into more areas. The more third-parties that we have tied into it, the better. The capabilities are there. As they just continue to involve the product, the more things that you can look into, then the more analytics that you can get. Also, the more data that we can get, then the better off we will be."
"I would like it to integrate with another solution, e.g., DNA."
"If they could make the Cisco Umbrella piece a little bit more advanced or easier to manage, that would help."
"It is good that it provides information. However, I think that there needs to be more actionable items for us based on the information provided."
"I would rate Splunk Phantom a seven out of 10."
"Overall, this product is fairly good but it's not quite mature yet. It needs some enhancement and some stabilization in some areas."
"Unfortunately, not all of our analysts are iPhone users or iOS users. The mobile app is only supported on iOS. Our analysts who have Android do not have that benefit. That would be a nice thing to have so that we can have it across the board and not just for iOS."
"The solution is a bit more expensive than other offerings."
"We've had trouble implementing the solution with Microsoft products. There seems to be an integration gap."
"There are areas in Splunk SOAR that have room for improvement. To make Splunk SOAR a better solution, there could be better built-in debugging tools, smarter playbook suggestions, and enhanced lifecycle management."
"I see room for improvement in Splunk SOAR regarding the learning curve, specifically breaking it down, as the Python side requires some technical knowledge."
"Portability is one thing that is currently lacking. The open-source product that I evaluated had portability. It would require a lot of development effort, but it will save the cost of rewriting all the playbooks."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is free. It can't get any better than that."
"For the value you get, the pricing of the solution is excellent."
"It would be nice if they had a different pricing model. Most of our budget for projects goes towards Cisco."
"The pricing is competitive, especially for education institutions. Licensing can be a little bit difficult to navigate, especially with resellers with Cisco, but for us it has been pretty easy."
"The pricing is the best part of this solution. It is free if you buy Umbrella or Duo Security. It is also a good solution."
"The product is absolutely free to any customer. As such, the only thing one must keep in mind is that as long as he already has one Cisco security product, irregardless of what that product is, SecureX is available for free."
"You can spend less money for another solution, but if you really want to have a good solution you have to pay. We are happy that we are getting such a good solution for what we are spending."
"Cisco SecureX is more expensive than Trend Micro. However, considering the integration capabilities with other solutions and the quality of technical support, I believe there's justification for the price difference."
"Splunk SOAR is an expensive solution for an organization of our size."
"The tool is not cheap."
"We renewed it this year. This year was the first time there was a dramatic increase in the price. It was kind of non-negotiable. It was just a high increase. We had internal communications, and it was definitely a surprise to us. In a short time frame, we renewed it this year. Prices are going up everywhere, but they are not always justifiable, at least not to our eyes. The pricing this year was definitely a big shock."
"When we first purchased our Splunk SOAR license, it was based on an event-count model. It was based on the number of events. I had strong opinions at the time that automation should not be stifled by the amount of automation you can accomplish, so the previous structure was not as beneficial for us. Later that year, we got told or saw at a conference that they announced user-based pricing. We are now in a renewal period, so we migrated to a user-based license model, which is more appropriate for us so that we no longer have to worry about stifling our automation based on the quantity."
"While I can't confirm the exact pricing, some colleagues have mentioned that Splunk SOAR may be on the costlier side."
"Splunk SOAR is more expensive compared to other options for SOAR."
"It's very overpriced because it is based on the number of users. There is no bulk licensing."
"Splunk SOAR is moderately priced, neither cheap nor overly expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
11%
Marketing Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Splunk Phantom?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is perfectly acceptable, helping us significantly with setup costs and licensing, and aiding in making approvals and assigning custo...
What needs improvement with Splunk Phantom?
From the improvement point of view regarding Splunk SOAR, I suggest including more types of LLM models such as autonomous AI models including Anthropic and Opus 4.6, as well as creating a playgroun...
What is your primary use case for Splunk Phantom?
The use cases that I work with mostly in Splunk SOAR include phishing email responses automation, where Splunk detects suspicious indicators such as the URL, IP, and geolocation from reputed VirusT...
 

Also Known As

Kenna.AppSec, Kenna.VI
Phantom
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NHS, Rackspace, UNC Pembroke, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Missing Piece
Recorded Future, Blackstone
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: May 2026.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.