Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 2025
Exabeam and Cortex XSIAM compete in the security logging and threat detection category. Exabeam is noted for user-friendliness and cost efficiency, whereas Cortex offers deeper integration and a streamlined detection process.
Features: Exabeam includes advanced analytics for improved security monitoring, user-friendly behavior analysis, and robust session-building capabilities. Cortex XSIAM provides a unified architecture that leverages machine learning for threat identification, efficient incident response, and integrates seamlessly with other Palo Alto products.
Room for Improvement: Exabeam needs enhancement in reducing false positives, better documentation, and improved API interaction. It also requires flexible global support and dashboard customization. Cortex XSIAM could optimize performance, enhance attack surface management, and increase integration capabilities. Both platforms struggle with technical support availability and response times outside key markets.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Exabeam allows both on-premises and cloud deployments, while Cortex XSIAM is cloud-based, which may restrict user flexibility. Exabeam has inconsistent customer service with variable response times, whereas Cortex generally receives positive feedback for more reliable support experiences.
Pricing and ROI: Exabeam provides a flexible pricing model that helps reduce operational costs and is often seen as competitive. Its cost is typically rated between six and seven out of ten. Cortex XSIAM offers competitive pricing, especially with specific contracts, although additional features can increase expenses. Both solutions provide a favorable return on investment, with Exabeam consolidating monitoring tools and reducing costs by up to 20%.
To learn more, read our detailed
Cortex XSIAM vs. Exabeam Report (Updated: January 2025).
