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

IBM Security QRadar vs Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 2025

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
7.5
IBM Security QRadar provides cost-effective value with strong ROI, efficient resource use, and quick threat response for organizations.
Sentiment score
7.4
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR enhances ROI through automation, integration, and efficient mature SOC processes, reducing investigation time.
Investing this amount was very much worth it for my organization.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.1
IBM QRadar customer service is praised for availability, but technical support receives mixed reviews due to inconsistent service levels.
Sentiment score
6.0
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR support is knowledgeable but varies in response times and service quality, needing possible improvements.
They assist with advanced issues, such as hardware or other problems, that are not part of standard operations.
The problem escalates through level one to level three, and then the process starts over with Novo again.
I received very good support, possibly due to a good relationship with IBM.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
IBM Security QRadar excels in scalable adaptability, supporting diverse environments and expansion with cloud options enhancing seamless growth.
Sentiment score
7.4
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is scalable, integrating well with APIs, though large deployments may face challenges and latency issues.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
IBM Security QRadar is stable if configured properly, with support praised, despite occasional issues during updates and high usage.
Sentiment score
7.8
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is stable and reliable, though minor bugs occur during updates and with oversized storage environments.
The product has been stable so far.
I think QRadar is stable and currently satisfies my needs.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM Security QRadar needs enhanced usability, integration, support, API access, automation, cost-efficiency, and customization to address user challenges.
Cortex XSOAR requires easier setup, better IoT support, improved UI, more connectors, flexible pricing, and enhanced documentation.
If AI-related support can suggest rules and integrate with existing security devices like MD, IPS, this SIM can create more relevant rules.
We receive logs from different types of devices and need a way to correlate them effectively.
Improving the integration with IBM Server for MetaMask for correlation rules would be beneficial.
The deployment requires integration and the development of integration modules.
 

Setup Cost

IBM Security QRadar provides competitive, negotiable pricing for enterprises, perceived as cost-effective compared to some competitors like Splunk.
Cortex XSOAR is seen as expensive yet valuable for security, with variable pricing and discounts post-Palo Alto acquisition.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Security QRadar excels with scalable log management, threat detection, user analytics, customization, and seamless integration for enhanced monitoring.
Cortex XSOAR offers user-friendly automation, integration, and playbook creation with efficient remediation, security features, and AI-enhanced threat intelligence.
Recently, I faced an incident, a cyber incident, and it was detected in real time.
IBM is seeking information about IBM QRadar because a part of QRadar, especially in the cloud, has been sold to Palo Alto.
Execution of automatic tasks for collecting, enriching, and correlating security events from hundreds of different technologies.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Security QRadar
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (6th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (4th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (18th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (10th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (13th)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of IBM Security QRadar is 7.5%, down from 8.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is 13.1%, down from 15.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain - PeerSpot reviewer
Real-time incident detection and user-friendly dashboard benefit daily operations
There are many types of AI, and this AI is very limited in SQL and features. There may be potential for improvement. So far, it seems very limited. It shows some good features in the correlation part, but I think there is room for improvement. For instance, when creating rules, it can suggest more rules, reducing the effort needed. If AI-related support can suggest rules and integrate with existing security devices like MD, IPS, this SIM can create more relevant rules. Sometimes logs I receive don't mean anything, and I need technical stakeholders to share or forward logs, but these are sometimes inadequate. Keywords can help identify insufficient logs. I often lack time to verify logs. Sharing false positive results could be reduced to help my team.
NikhilSharma2 - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to multiple playbooks to fetch data from multiple firewalls and utomated several tasks, including vulnerability scans and SOCL (Security Orchestration, Automation
Recently, they started implementing microservices in XSOAR, which has improved quality and addressed previous issues. However, they should focus more on licensing costs. The user licensing fees are quite high. For example, I received a quote for XSOAR, and it was $12,000 per user per year. If you have a SOC team of 30 members/analysts, you're looking at a substantial expense. They should consider reducing these costs since this high pricing seems to be more about profit. So, there is room for improvement in the pricing. Moreover, the reporting and dashboard features are decent but could be improved. The user interface (UI) is quite heavy and takes time to load, which is a major drawback.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
831,158 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
Educational Organization
24%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What are the biggest differences between Securonix UEBA, Exabeam, and IBM QRadar?
It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendlier GUI and are not licensed based on capacity (amount of logs and information in...
What SOC product do you recommend?
For tools I’d recommend: -SIEM- LogRhythm -SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is asking to miss details that are critical, and ending up a statistic. Also, rememb...
What do you like most about IBM QRadar?
The event collector, flow collector, PCAP and SOAR are valuable.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
Even though customers often comment on the price, the potential savings come from managing a large number of security events with a limited number of analysts. This leads to economic advantages des...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
The complexity of Cortex XSOAR has a trade-off with its versatility. The product can be tailored for each deployment to respond to specific customer needs, and this complexity may be seen as a down...
 

Also Known As

IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, QRadar, IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Cellcom Israel, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, esri, Cylance, Flatiron Health, Veeva, ADT Cybersecurity
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Security QRadar vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.