Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and Tines compete in the security orchestration, automation, and response (SOAR) solutions category. Tines has an advantage due to its flexible automation features, while Cortex XSOAR offers a comprehensive suite of integrated security tools.
Features: Cortex XSOAR provides extensive integrative security features including advanced incident management, robust threat intelligence services, and a vast range of security tool integrations. Tines offers intuitive automation capabilities, customizable security operations without extensive coding knowledge, and streamlined workflows to enhance efficiency.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cortex XSOAR is deployed in complex environments requiring customization and service management, complemented by extensive customer support networks. Tines offers a straightforward setup with less intensive deployment efforts and rapid customer support for swift onboarding and usability.
Pricing and ROI: Cortex XSOAR has higher initial setup costs, delivering significant ROI for large-scale operations with extensive functionalities. Tines offers budget-friendly pricing suitable for smaller teams, focusing on efficient capabilities and quick ROI with lower upfront expenses.
Since we started working with Torq, I am handling much fewer alerts. It is becoming really easy for me to handle an alert.
We have seen a return on investment, targeting a $600,000 ROI for the year.
By the time we officially bought Torq, we already had two workflows that were very helpful to us.
We are positioning Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, which can be used in the SOC and do a lot of automation for the customer.
I can speak for fewer employees needed because we used to require many analysts to deal with all the alerts that we were generating, but now we have about 90 to 95% of the alerts already automated through Tines, which requires tremendous time saved and a ton of reduction in the number of analysts required.
In some domains, we were in a position to actually let go of people, meaning at least two people have been reduced from one team, which saves a lot of cost for the organization.
We did not see proper value in it, whereas other platforms would have given much higher value for us.
My impression of their technical support during the initial setup was that they were helpful, responded within a reasonable timeframe, and provided exactly what we needed.
The speed and quality of their answers have been pretty good, as I usually get a response within 24 hours, and they follow up well.
We can always get an answer, and the support team are experts in their own system.
Eight out of ten times, they provide valuable help.
Their support has been better than Anomali's and they are more responsive.
The technical support provided by Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is good.
Whenever we hit roadblocks or issues with the platform or story, even if it was our mistake, the people from the most senior engineering team of Tines immediately were willing to get on call with us.
I would rate the customer support a ten on a scale of one to ten.
The support and engineering team is quick to resolve bugs and respond promptly.
Our case management is super scalable.
In terms of scalability, you can do as long as you can build it, and they can support it.
Regarding the ability of the solution to grow in your work environment, if it is scalable, if it fits your business requirements, and if there is room to scale up, the answer is yes, for sure.
The scalability of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR supports our growth and security needs because we can integrate various tools and continuously add more capability.
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR has very good application capabilities and is highly scalable.
The issues with scalability arise from the speed of some integrations, as not all are perfectly tuned by Palo.
It is built for growing teams and has more complex automation capacity.
Whenever this became insufficient, we could easily reach out to the Tines team where they immediately gave us a remedy or fixed the issue.
From the workloads we have, it can scale for different workflows and add more workflows.
We have been using Torq for one and a half years, but we have experienced no downtime.
Most of the time, the system is stable as long as the components that they integrate with are stable.
I have never faced any downtime or issues.
The system works smoothly even when I navigate deep into the playbook section.
I would rate the stability and reliability of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR as a nine.
The tool is stable up to ninety-nine point nine percent.
Tines is very stable.
Torq should offer default templates that can directly scan firewall data and automate actions.
The AI value depends on maturity. Real value depends heavily on telemetry, integration depth, and workflow design, all of which rely on how mature customers are in their SOC department.
It was able to capture data but was unable to differentiate between the agent hostname we are using and the hostname that resides on the back end of the Internet.
The deployment requires integration and the development of integration modules.
One of the significant issues we encounter is system slowdown when we receive an influx of alerts, which inhibits how quickly we can access the information needed for investigation.
To improve the solution, it needs to have complete features that are low-code, no-code, and should be plug-and-play.
Reporting and dashboards could be more advanced for deeper analysis.
The issue with the Implode action is that once we get a certain number of events into the Implode action, we lose context of all the events except the last one that came in, so it is a bit difficult to send data back once it goes through the Implode action.
I think they need to add more intelligence to the workflow layer because, depending upon what they have right now, it could be possible for Claude or Copilot or ChatGPT to have that feature quickly.
When they bring more and more value into the platform, it makes more sense to pay that price, but still, it is expensive.
Before deciding to implement Torq, I considered that compared to our old case management platform, Torq was a much better price and had a lot better value for what you get out of the platform, which was a key consideration for the company.
It is an expensive solution, not an inexpensive solution, but we get through the flexibility.
For customers, it is zero versus $20 million, which is why they have to make a decision.
Tines required no setup cost since we just used their cloud tier and built everything with internal engineering resources.
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is very good.
I did not handle the purchasing side, so I did not actually know the exact pricing or the licensing details.
Torq's unified platform approach to AI SOC automation and case management has significantly benefited us by integrating the case management platform with the automation, which saves time compared to managing multiple point solutions across our security stack.
The fact that I can build whatever I want within my own imagination and skills without relying on code is the best thing about Torq.
You can copy and paste a cURL command. If you have documentation or APIs, you usually have an example on the side. You basically have all the information on how the API call should be. You can just copy that and paste it into a step, and it will just build the step for you.
Execution of automatic tasks for collecting, enriching, and correlating security events from hundreds of different technologies.
If I already have an established process, I do not have to change my process to fit into the tool. I can modify the tool to fit into my process, which makes things considerably easier.
We have implemented automation features, such as automated responses to email threats and automatic configuration of target devices for blocking specific IPs.
It helps in streamlining our security operations effectively and efficiently without requiring coding knowledge.
What stands out mostly about Tines's features is the integrations. It connects easily with tools such as Slack, emails, and spreadsheets, and it makes data moves automatically without much work.
Tines caught the failure and queued them automatically. We did not lose a single student log.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR | 8.7% |
| Torq | 3.8% |
| Tines | 4.5% |
| Other | 83.0% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 2 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 5 |
| Large Enterprise | 5 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 21 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 9 |
| Large Enterprise | 26 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 2 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 1 |
| Large Enterprise | 4 |
Torq is the enterprise AI SOC solution that effectively combines adaptive insights and automation to handle critical threats efficiently. It manages threat lifecycles, swiftly moving from triage to response, ensuring effective risk management.
Torq is designed to streamline security operations by aggregating telemetry across your security stack. It investigates significant risks and manages threats from triage to containment and remediation. This AI-driven tool enhances the capabilities of your SecOps team, allowing them to achieve more impactful results without introducing complicated processes.
What are the key features of Torq?In industries like finance and healthcare, Torq shows effectiveness by adapting to specific risk scenarios often encountered in these fields. Its integration with existing infrastructures makes it a valuable asset for maintaining stringent security standards, essential for protecting critical data and operations in diverse high-stakes environments.
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR enhances security operations automation and integration. Users rely on its incident management capabilities and machine learning to improve response times and efficiency.
Cortex XSOAR stands out for its capability to automate and orchestrate security tasks through customizable playbooks and robust third-party integrations. Its analytics offer insights into incidents, while machine learning prioritizes alerts and reduces false positives. Despite its powerful features, users note room for improvement in documentation, interface design, and integration capabilities. Cost and complexity in setup and deployment are also concerns. Users in security operations centers benefit significantly from automated data enrichment, streamlined incident response, and efficient handling of threats like phishing and endpoint management.
What are the key features of Cortex XSOAR?Cortex XSOAR is implemented across industries for automating and streamlining security operations. Organizations use it to create playbooks, integrate with security tools, and automate repetitive tasks, thereby improving the efficiency of their security operations centers and incident management processes.
Tines offers no-code and low-code automation for users to automate tasks without coding expertise, integrating seamlessly with APIs to enhance incident management and security operations.
Known for a vendor-neutral approach, Tines provides detailed documentation and live chat support, allowing for effective integration with other tools, scheduling capabilities, and streamlined processes that save time and effort. Users find it intuitive for efficient task handling, making manual intervention unnecessary. Challenges include the need for more comprehensive documentation and instructional videos, as well as improvements in AI integration and reporting aesthetics. Pricing is also noted as higher compared to alternatives.
What are the most important features of Tines?Tines primarily serves organizations in the security sector, automating security operations such as alert detection and managed detection and response. It's utilized extensively in security operation centers for tasks like phishing email processing, ticket creation, IOC investigations, and ticket assignments within enterprise security frameworks, with multiple teams delivering Tines services to enhance task handling efficiency.
We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.