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 Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Security QRadar
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
204
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) (14th)
Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of IBM Security QRadar is 8.0%, down from 9.0% 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

Muzzamil Hussain - PeerSpot reviewer
Is easy to integrate and doesn't require maintenance
One major drawback we are facing is in the area of IBM Security QRadar integration with flat file databases. IBM Security QRadar does not support flat file database integration. We are currently facing an issue with respect to the database, which you normally call a NoSQL database. There is no direct integration mechanism available with IBM Security QRadar. We have to approach IBM and generate a ticket so that they can develop a custom method for the integration. In database integration, we are facing issues with IBM Security QRadar. The solution does not support the integration of flat file databases. Certain organizations have flat file databases. IBM does not support direct integration with some databases. We had to create a plug, and we requested IBM to develop a parser, but it is taking IBM a couple of months to develop it. I think a flat-file database should be supported directly instead of developing a parser plugin. There should be a more refined threat intelligence platform, and cross-integration should be possible with locally available threat intelligence platforms.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson is a stable solution."
"The product can scale."
"The ability to add extensions is the most valuable feature. For example, extensions that provide valuable test ports."
"The interface is good."
"It does good correlation for events. It does good general analysis, and it has good apps as well."
"There are other third-party plugins that we can use."
"The stability is good."
"think QRadar is great overall. We’ve had a positive experience with it and recommend it for deployment. However, there are areas for improvement. The technical support is good, and the documentation is valuable, but it could be enhanced, especially regarding integration with other systems. In terms of support and updates, QRadar’s capabilities are crucial for maintaining high security standards. Network and software administrators can monitor all traffic effectively, which reassures clients and drives further adoption."
"The Palo Alto ecosystem has a marketplace offering integration with Sentinel or other products."
"The most valuable features are the orchestration because of the way in which it coordinates the loss from all the devices and it provides us with a high-level overview of the critical log information."
"I have no complaints about Cortex's stability."
"The repository of playbooks and the integration between Palo Alto and IBM QRadar are some useful features"
"Palo Alto has gotten the investigators more presence to actually go in the report because being that the platform will email the investigator that it's been assigned to, now the investigators will jump in there and start going through the review process a lot quicker."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to configure."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are its overall track record and features that fit our use case."
"It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"The solution should enhance its capabilities of UEBA and AI/ML tech modeling."
"The user interface is a bit clunky, a bit hard to find what you need."
"The weak signal detection with QRadar needs improvement. You can detect what you know, but what is unknown to the rule engine can't be detected."
"IBM Security QRadar’s GUI could be improved."
"I would like to see some artificial intelligence and alternative solutions."
"Integration could be better. They should make it easy to integrate with other solutions."
"The custom rules could be simplified more or it should be possible to use a different language, other than the ones that the solution is already using. They should add other languages into the mix."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup due to bandwidth issues."
"It doesn't offer automatic internet reports out of the box."
"XSOAR could have more integration options."
"It is not a very scalable solution."
"Corex XSOAR could be improved by reducing the time it takes to process large amounts of data and increasing the number of integrations."
"The dashboard could be better."
"The price of the solution could be improved."
"There should be an on-premise version available for customers to have different choices."
"The solution requires DV but does not support open-source DV elastic searches."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is a license to use this solution, which is paid annually. However, there are subscription options available."
"It could be cheaper, but the value itself is far more important for us than the price. Typically, our clients have yearly subscriptions."
"The price of this solution is reasonable."
"As for licensing costs, I haven't seen the exact figures, but it is considered somewhat costly. On a scale from one to ten, where one is very expensive and ten is very cheap, I would rate it a six—it’s costly but worth the money."
"IBM's Qradar is not for small companie. Unfortunately, it would be 'overkill' to place it plainly. The pricing would be too much."
"It is costlier as compared to the other alternatives available in the market."
"It is expensive. It is not a product that I can provide for SMBs. It is a program that I can only provide for really large enterprises."
"found other solutions, with more features at the same cost or less. You don’t have to leave the Gartner Magic Quadrant to beat their price."
"The pricing is fair. The pricing reflects the value and feature set it offers."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is expensive."
"The solution's pricing needs improvement."
"From the cost perspective, I have heard that its price is a bit high as compared to other similar products."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could be reduced. We are always looking for a discount. There is an annual license needed to use this solution."
"There is a perception that it is priced very high compared to other solutions."
"Palo Alto offers significant discounts to customers who purchase the products repeatedly."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is comparable to other solutions in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 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
23%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
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?
I do not know about the pricing as it was handled by the salespeople.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR?
Creating complex playbooks using coding languages, such as Python, could be easier. Sometimes the process becomes tedious and requires manual tasks.
 

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: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.