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

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs Proofpoint Threat Response 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

Palo Alto Networks Cortex X...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (2nd), SOC as a Service (2nd)
Proofpoint Threat Response
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is designed for Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) and holds a mindshare of 11.2%, down 13.2% compared to last year.
Proofpoint Threat Response, on the other hand, focuses on Security Incident Response, holds 15.8% mindshare, up 8.5% since last year.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
Security Incident Response
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Giuseppe Sgroi - PeerSpot reviewer
Blocks potential spam emails efficiently and integrates well with our security framework
We use the product to verify and manage emails sent and received through our Microsoft Exchange server, focusing on blocking potential spam emails The platform's most valuable include the ability to check emails and block potential spam. The platform's technical support services and pricing need…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It was useful as a ticketing tool."
"Cortex XSOAR's most valuable features are the playbooks, custom integration, the machine-learning model, and the layout, classifier, and mapper."
"From the security team's standpoint, the solution has improved our organization's overall cybersecurity."
"The most valuable features are simplicity and ease of integration."
"The repository of playbooks and the integration between Palo Alto and IBM QRadar are some useful features"
"We use the solution to automate our SIEM tools and incidents."
"Palo Alto is easy to use."
"The solution provides threat intelligence with EDR."
"It has reduced our manual efforts to remove emails from each user's inbox, and in this case we do not have to ask our IT department or users to do so."
"Support is very responsive."
"If something's pulled and then it's later declared a false positive, it will automatically restore. They also take automatic feeds from their advanced threat detection modules."
"The platform's most valuable include the ability to check emails and block potential spam."
"The best part of Proofpoint Threat Response is the Auto-Pull feature. Being able to pull an email back from a user's mailbox is very useful, yet I have noticed that not a lot of organizations use this kind of feature."
 

Cons

"The solution's technical support could be better."
"Corex XSOAR could be improved by reducing the time it takes to process large amounts of data and increasing the number of integrations."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"In terms of improvement, it needs to be more modular. It's not. When you're working in layouts and you create specific apps within layouts, there's no portability right now in order to reuse that code across multiple layouts. I can't take a tab and say I want to use this tab on these other layouts. I have to physically go in there and recreate it from scratch, which is maddening."
"Previously, when Demisto was, there was a community edition; we could use it, reinstall it, and customize it. Since Palo Alto took over, it has become more financially oriented. It's business, but they could offer a pro model and a lighter model for different needs."
"The user interface (UI) is quite heavy and takes time to load, which is a major drawback."
"The product can be tailored for each deployment to respond to specific customer needs, and this complexity may be seen as a downside."
"The formats are not compatible, are readily not available, and are not readable."
"If the reporting gets improved then it would be better, but the product is running amazing as it is."
"Has some quirks."
"The on-premise version doesn't scale well for large companies."
"The interface within Threat Response could be made simpler."
"The platform's technical support services and pricing need improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When I first looked at Demisto, it had a price tag of $250,000 but when we finally purchased it, it was $345,000."
"From the cost perspective, I have heard that its price is a bit high as compared to other similar products."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price, I rate the pricing a nine."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is expensive."
"My company did not make any payments towards the licensing costs attached to the product since we were only using its pilot version."
"The solution's cost is reasonable."
"The solution is based on an annual licensing model that is expensive."
"Palo Alto offers significant discounts to customers who purchase the products repeatedly."
"The way most big companies work with Proofpoint is that they try to tie everything into an enterprise license. I can't comment on the actual costs, however I do know that alternative solutions such as Abnormal Security can be much more expensive than Proofpoint Threat Response."
"It's quite affordable to have it with this much functionality and ease to administrate."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Healthcare Company
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Proofpoint Threat Response?
I have a vague idea because I don't know what others are charging. But we felt that putting up with the pains and having to spend more time keeping it running than we expected is still better than ...
What needs improvement with Proofpoint Threat Response?
The platform's technical support services and pricing need improvement.
What is your primary use case for Proofpoint Threat Response?
We use the product to verify and manage emails sent and received through our Microsoft Exchange server, focusing on blocking potential spam emails.
 

Also Known As

Demisto Enterprise, Cortex XSOAR, Demisto
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cellcom Israel, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, esri, Cylance, Flatiron Health, Veeva, ADT Cybersecurity
University of Waterloo, Akorn, Fenwick and West LLP
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks, Splunk and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR). Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.