Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Fortinet FortiSOAR based on the interviews we conducted with its users.
The top alternative solutions include Microsoft Sentinel, Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, and Splunk SOAR.
The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.
Fortinet Alternatives Report
Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Fortinet, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
FortiSOAR offers appealing pricing, strong customer support, and versatile automation, making it ideal for businesses seeking effective SOAR solutions. In comparison, Microsoft Sentinel excels in AI-driven analytics and Azure integration, attracting tech buyers focused on scalability and comprehensive SIEM features.
Fortinet FortiSOAR features straightforward setup costs with a focus on scalability, while Microsoft Sentinel offers budget-friendly options suitable for smaller businesses. The primary difference lies in the scalability and cost-effectiveness of each solution.
Fortinet FortiSOAR features straightforward setup costs with a focus on scalability, while Microsoft Sentinel offers budget-friendly options suitable for smaller businesses. The primary difference lies in the scalability and cost-effectiveness of each solution.
Fortinet FortiSOAR excels in integration and customization with a user-friendly setup. In comparison, Cortex XSOAR emphasizes advanced automation and threat management. Fortinet's pricing appeals to budget-conscious buyers, while Cortex justifies its cost with robust threat detection and operational efficiency.
Fortinet FortiSOAR is noted for its moderate setup cost, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR offers a more budget-friendly option. The notable difference in their pricing may influence initial investment considerations for prospective users.
Fortinet FortiSOAR is noted for its moderate setup cost, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR offers a more budget-friendly option. The notable difference in their pricing may influence initial investment considerations for prospective users.
Fortinet FortiSOAR offers user-friendly interfaces and diverse automation, appealing to those seeking ease of use and rapid deployment. In comparison, Splunk SOAR provides advanced customization and robust features for tech buyers needing flexible, comprehensive solutions for detailed threat detection and response.
ThreatConnect TIP is favored for its affordability and user-friendly deployment, enhancing threat intelligence and faster integration. In comparison, Fortinet FortiSOAR appeals for advanced automation and customization, rewarding users willing to invest in comprehensive features for enhanced incident response efficiency.
ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) offers a structured setup cost that may appeal to established enterprises, while Fortinet FortiSOAR provides a flexible cost structure, catering to a broader range of businesses with varying budget constraints.
ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) offers a structured setup cost that may appeal to established enterprises, while Fortinet FortiSOAR provides a flexible cost structure, catering to a broader range of businesses with varying budget constraints.
Fortinet FortiSOAR, praised for cost-efficient pricing and superior support, excels in automation and swift third-party tool integration. In comparison, ServiceNow Security Operations, justifying its higher cost, offers advanced analytics and integrated dashboards for enhanced security visibility through extensive integration capabilities.
Fortinet FortiSOAR is noted for its affordable setup costs, while ServiceNow Security Operations requires a higher initial investment. The significant price difference highlights FortiSOAR as a cost-effective option compared to ServiceNow.
Fortinet FortiSOAR is noted for its affordable setup costs, while ServiceNow Security Operations requires a higher initial investment. The significant price difference highlights FortiSOAR as a cost-effective option compared to ServiceNow.
IBM Resilient excels in incident response and seamless integration with IBM products, appealing to users seeking centralized management and mature platform capabilities. In comparison, Fortinet FortiSOAR attracts those valuing advanced dashboards, diverse connectors, and flexible pricing for comprehensive threat management.
Fortinet FortiSOAR excels in integration and ease of deployment with strong support, appealing to budget-conscious companies. In comparison, Swimlane offers advanced automation and customization, with higher initial costs but enhanced long-term ROI, ideal for enterprises seeking intricate automation features.
Fortinet FortiSOAR typically involves higher setup costs, while Swimlane offers a more cost-effective initial setup. Differences in pricing structures highlight Fortinet FortiSOAR's premium positioning versus Swimlane's appeal to budget-conscious users.
Fortinet FortiSOAR typically involves higher setup costs, while Swimlane offers a more cost-effective initial setup. Differences in pricing structures highlight Fortinet FortiSOAR's premium positioning versus Swimlane's appeal to budget-conscious users.
Fortinet FortiSOAR offers cost-effective pricing and seamless integration with strong automation capabilities. In comparison, ThreatQ presents advanced threat intelligence features and data management, appealing to those needing comprehensive security insights despite its higher price, balancing initial costs with its long-term value.
Fortinet FortiSOAR's initial setup cost is high, potentially impacting budget planning. ThreatQ, on the other hand, has a lower setup cost, making it more accessible for organizations with limited budgets.
Fortinet FortiSOAR's initial setup cost is high, potentially impacting budget planning. ThreatQ, on the other hand, has a lower setup cost, making it more accessible for organizations with limited budgets.
FortiSOAR offers extensive customization and scalability, appealing to organizations needing tailored threat response. In comparison, Google Security Operations integrates deeply with Google's ecosystem and provides real-time threat detection, ideal for enterprises utilizing Google services extensively.
Fortinet FortiSOAR generally has a higher setup cost, while Google Security Operations tends to be more cost-effective. The differences in initial investment can impact budget considerations for businesses evaluating these security solutions.
Fortinet FortiSOAR generally has a higher setup cost, while Google Security Operations tends to be more cost-effective. The differences in initial investment can impact budget considerations for businesses evaluating these security solutions.
Fortinet FortiSOAR, known for its automation capabilities and rapid deployment, appeals to buyers seeking integration with existing systems. In comparison, Cyware Cyber Fusion attracts those prioritizing threat intelligence and collaboration, valuing its advanced features despite higher costs.
Fortinet FortiSOAR offers a straightforward setup cost structure, while Cyware Cyber Fusion presents a more flexible setup pricing option, highlighting the distinct approaches in financial commitment and initial investment.
Fortinet FortiSOAR offers a straightforward setup cost structure, while Cyware Cyber Fusion presents a more flexible setup pricing option, highlighting the distinct approaches in financial commitment and initial investment.
Fortinet FortiSOAR excels in advanced playbook automation and integration with other Fortinet tools, appealing for its cost-effective model. In comparison, Rapid7 InsightConnect offers extensive third-party integrations and user-friendly automation, making it ideal for swift setup and adaptable deployments.
Fortinet FortiSOAR has a higher setup cost, while Rapid7 InsightConnect offers a more budget-friendly initial investment. The distinct pricing difference could influence decisions based on project budget constraints.
Fortinet FortiSOAR has a higher setup cost, while Rapid7 InsightConnect offers a more budget-friendly initial investment. The distinct pricing difference could influence decisions based on project budget constraints.
Fortinet FortiSOAR excels in integration and scalability, making it suitable for efficient security management. In comparison, D3 Security offers advanced workflows and rich visualization, attracting enterprises seeking detailed analysis. Fortinet targets budget-conscious strategies, whereas D3 provides long-term value with sophisticated features.
Fortinet FortiSOAR has a straightforward setup cost, while D3 Security might require more investment to configure properly. Fortinet FortiSOAR's pricing is designed for quick integration, contrasting with D3 Security's potentially higher initial configuration costs.
Fortinet FortiSOAR has a straightforward setup cost, while D3 Security might require more investment to configure properly. Fortinet FortiSOAR's pricing is designed for quick integration, contrasting with D3 Security's potentially higher initial configuration costs.
