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

IBM Security QRadar vs Secureworks Taegis XDR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (7th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
IBM Security QRadar
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
217
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (7th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (3rd), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (2nd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (16th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (6th)
Secureworks Taegis XDR
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
21st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Network Detection and Response (NDR) (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Extended Detection and Response (XDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 4.9%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Security QRadar is 3.1%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Secureworks Taegis XDR is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks4.9%
IBM Security QRadar3.1%
Secureworks Taegis XDR1.5%
Other90.5%
Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
HarshBhardiya - PeerSpot reviewer
SOC Engineer at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Have managed daily asset and alert monitoring effectively but have encountered limitations with manual processes and interface usability
It's still very manual and doesn't work on its own. It's still in an early stage and not on par where we can consider it a really successful detection system. The accuracy is not there. The UI could be better when compared to Sentinels where we can use flags and tagging. It could be much more user-friendly. IBM Security QRadar has all features and is fully competitive with other SIEM tools, but when it comes to user-friendliness, a new user takes time to get used to it. More intuitive, user-friendly interfaces and more helpful documentation would be beneficial. The query searching and data fetching could be faster. In large to very large organizations with around 5,000 or 6,000 assets or beyond, even with proper configurations and RAM and hardware backing up, the query is fairly slow.
Mohammad Talha Talkin Alam - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Manager IT at PDS Multinational
Improved network protection has secured our servers and monitors web and application traffic
Till now, I have not seen any weak point that needs to be improved in Secureworks Taegis XDR. I think that since the technology is becoming upgraded, it will be good for Sophos to include more features in future updates of this solution. Secureworks Taegis XDR is a good product, but it should include AI technology.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution allows us to gain remote access without the user's knowledge and take the necessary actions on the device."
"The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."
"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"Cortex is a very good total solution on the endpoints."
"I generally believe that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is probably the best in the market right now."
"If any application performs suspicious activities, such as changing registries or modifying other applications, Cortex XDR detects and blocks the entire application."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks should be a stable solution."
"The circumvention method and the patch method is perfected very well in the QRadar area."
"SIEM technology is the most valuable feature of this solution, as it can be integrated with almost every application and system."
"Overall, aside from support issues, we've been happy with the solution."
"I look at the solution as the best-of-the-breed product."
"It is a bit easier to use than other products, such as Splunk or ELK Elasticsearch."
"There is a single dashboard that gives us a complete overview of what is happening around the globe."
"Integrations are quite a useful and key feature of this solution. It has integration with the CVSS score, which is a central point for all the data and scores about the threats. There is an IBM Bluemix dashboard that is integrated with the CVSS score."
"The most valuable features are the versatility of this solution and the variety of things you can do with it."
"It's a complete solution package."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Definitely, Secureworks Taegis XDR is cost effective for the long run since the product is at a lower cost rather than other brands."
 

Cons

"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."
"It takes time to scan the servers and devices."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a very good product, but financially, it is very expensive, so the company should look into that area."
"This product has not improved my organization - in fact, we are in the process of moving back to another product as a result of Cortex's horrible impact on system performance."
"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR does not detect malicious activity like in other anti-virus solutions like Trend Micro and Windows with Cisco."
"The dashboard is pathetic and it takes a long time to perform a search."
"IBM QRadar is pricey, and therefore, usually small enterprises are not able to afford it."
"The reporting system could use some upgrading."
"There are several vulnerabilities that IBM is working with us on."
"In the new log source management app if you have a large number of log sources, typing a name to filter them by is Java Hell, the high overhead of JIT compiled code means that even two-fingered carpal tunnel afflicted users can outpace the type-ahead buffer, leaving random intermediate characters on the floor."
"The tool is very complicated."
"The SQL database on the back end takes some time and it's not so flexible in data storage or data lake creation, so that is the only backfall of QRadar."
"QRadar's issue is it needs to add behavioral analytics."
"The pricing could be improved."
"Secureworks Taegis XDR is a good product, but it should include AI technology."
"We found limitations in the XDR's detections, lacking the ability to create customized detection and log parsing rules."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"Cortex XDR's pricing is ok."
"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"The price was fine."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require."
"There is a license to use this solution, which is paid annually. However, there are subscription options available."
"The solution's pricing is based on the EPS model."
"Pricing is good."
"It's not expensive for the resources that it gives you."
"It is a perpetual license that we have for the event collector. The licensing is done based on the number of events and flows that you receive on this particular device. These are perpetual licenses, which means once you purchase them, they don't expire, which means that the support to IBM is definitely renewed after every one year. We have an enterprise agreement with IBM, which puts the cost in a totally different category as compared to someone who is not an IBM partner and is approaching IBM for this solution. We were able to get massive discounts. To give you an idea, we recently purchased 30,000 event licenses, and it costs around $480,000. It is definitely not a cheap product. We have licenses for about 270,000 events per second and 3 million flows per second. All the appliances and their events and flows are basically clubbed together and charged or rather calculated through a single source. The console receives all the details from all the event processes that we have globally. So, the license that we have is a single license for 270,000 events per second and 3 million flows per second, but that can be managed centrally. I was only part of the secondary purchase, which was 30,000 events per second for about $480,000. You can calculate how much we paid for 270,000 events. Reducing its price would be a compromise. We have already used a lower-priced product in the form of NNT, but we had to get rid of it because it was not doing the job that we actually wanted to do. You get what you pay for."
"You have a one-time payment, and you also can purchase it for one year as a subscription. We have it on-premise, and we have a permanent license for it. We have to pay for the support on a yearly basis. If you compare its cost with Sentinel for one year, QRadar would seem more expensive, but if you compare its cost over five or ten years, Azure Sentinel will be more expensive than QRadar. If you compare its cost with Sentinel for one year, QRadar would seem more expensive, but if you compare its cost over five or 10 years, Azure Sentinel can be more expensive than QRadar."
"The solution is costly and the price differs depending on the vendor you use."
"Go through a vulnerability assessment review for price breaks. A virtualized solution will also cut down on cost."
"The pricing is six out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Extended Detection and Response (XDR) solutions are best for your needs.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
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
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Performing Arts
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business91
Midsize Enterprise39
Large Enterprise105
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
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, friendli...
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 a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Security QRadar?
Pricing and the license of EPS were managed by the governance team. I was not responsible for managing those. I was s...
What needs improvement with Secureworks Taegis XDR?
Till now, I have not seen any weak point that needs to be improved in Secureworks Taegis XDR. I think that since the ...
What is your primary use case for Secureworks Taegis XDR?
I use Secureworks Taegis XDR within my organization primarily to secure our network infrastructure so that none can a...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
Secureworks Taegis NDR
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Security QRadar vs. Secureworks Taegis XDR and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.