Top 10 Google Security Operations Alternatives

4.5 out of 5

4 reviews
83% willing to recommend

Top Google Security Operations Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Google Security Operations 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. Google Security Operations surpasses its competitors by offering advanced threat detection, real-time incident response, and robust automation, ensuring optimal protection, streamlined processes, and comprehensive security coverage to meet the demands of modern enterprises.

Google Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Google, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.

Get the alternatives report

Microsoft Sentinel

4.1 out of 5

Microsoft Sentinel

4.1 out of 5

Google Security Operations focuses on streamlined automation and affordable pricing, catering to Google Cloud environments. In comparison, Microsoft Sentinel targets diverse infrastructure with extensive third-party support, advanced analytics, and hybrid deployment options, providing versatility for organizations seeking robust integration across multiple platforms.

Download Google Security Operations vs. Microsoft Sentinel Report

Pricing

Google Security Operations offers a low initial setup cost, while Microsoft Sentinel presents a more substantial investment upfront, emphasizing their distinct approaches to deployment costs.

View comparison

Pricing

Google Security Operations offers a low initial setup cost, while Microsoft Sentinel presents a more substantial investment upfront, emphasizing their distinct approaches to deployment costs.

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR

4.2 out of 5

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR

4.2 out of 5

Google Security Operations focuses on integrations and threat detection, ideal for Google Cloud users. In comparison, Cortex XSOAR emphasizes automation and orchestration, streamlining incident management. Google appeals with competitive pricing; Cortex XSOAR offers significant time savings despite higher initial costs.

Download Google Security Operations vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Report

Pricing

Google Security Operations generally requires a minimal setup cost, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR might involve higher initial investment due to its extensive feature set. Google's offering is accessible for smaller budgets, contrasting with Palo Alto's robust, feature-heavy pla...

View comparison

Pricing

Splunk SOAR

4.1 out of 5

Splunk SOAR

4.1 out of 5

Google Security Operations excels in integration with Google services, offering competitive pricing and ROI. In comparison, Splunk SOAR provides robust automation and feature richness, with higher costs justified by its adaptability across security environments. Tech buyers may choose based on specific feature needs and existing ecosystems.

Download Google Security Operations vs. Splunk SOAR Report

Pricing

Google Security Operations has low initial setup costs, while Splunk SOAR is associated with higher deployment expenses. This difference highlights Google's cost-efficient entry point compared to Splunk's potentially more resource-intensive installation process.

View comparison

Pricing

ServiceNow Security Operations

4.0 out of 5

ServiceNow Security Operations

4.0 out of 5

Google Security Operations offers automation and cloud integration at a competitive price, attracting budget-conscious enterprises. In comparison, ServiceNow Security Operations provides comprehensive incident management and remediation, appealing to organizations needing extensive functionality despite a higher cost.

Download Google Security Operations vs. ServiceNow Security Operations Report

Pricing

Google Security Operations offers a streamlined setup process, whereas ServiceNow Security Operations presents higher initial configuration costs, highlighting a significant cost difference in their initial deployment.

View comparison

Pricing

Tines

4.5 out of 5

Tines

4.5 out of 5

Google Security Operations offers integration with Google Cloud services and advanced threat detection, appealing to existing Google users. In comparison, Tines provides no-code automation for scalable workflows, suitable for those seeking user-friendly automation features.

Download Google Security Operations vs. Tines Report

Pricing

Google Security Operations offers a competitive setup cost, while Tines provides a low-cost alternative, highlighting the contrast in initial investment requirements.

View comparison

Pricing

Google Security Operations offers a competitive setup cost, while Tines provides a low-cost alternative, highlighting the contrast in initial investment requirements.

Fortinet FortiSOAR

3.8 out of 5

Fortinet FortiSOAR

3.8 out of 5

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.

Download Fortinet FortiSOAR vs. Google Security Operations Report

Pricing

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.

View comparison

Pricing

Swimlane

3.8 out of 5

Swimlane

3.8 out of 5

Google Security Operations excels in integration with Google Cloud, ideal for enterprises deep in Google ecosystems. In comparison, Swimlane impresses with advanced automation, appealing to organizations seeking to automate security operations comprehensively. Both solutions offer unique benefits catering to different organizational priorities.

Download Google Security Operations vs. Swimlane Report

Pricing

Google Security Operations offers a straightforward setup with lower initial costs compared to Swimlane, which involves higher setup expenses.

View comparison

Pricing

Google Security Operations offers a straightforward setup with lower initial costs compared to Swimlane, which involves higher setup expenses.

IBM Resilient

3.7 out of 5

IBM Resilient

3.7 out of 5

IBM Resilient provides robust threat management with its automation and incident response playbooks. In comparison, Google Security Operations excels in advanced analytics and AI integration with Google Cloud services. IBM offers quick deployment, while Google provides scalability and long-term ROI with sophisticated threat detection.

Download Google Security Operations vs. IBM Resilient Report

Pricing

IBM Resilient offers a scalable setup cost, while Google Security Operations provides a more economical startup.

View comparison

Pricing

IBM Resilient offers a scalable setup cost, while Google Security Operations provides a more economical startup.

Rapid7 InsightConnect

4.0 out of 5

Rapid7 InsightConnect

4.0 out of 5

Google Security Operations integrates seamlessly with Google Cloud, appealing to users seeking ease of integration and real-time threat alerts. In comparison, Rapid7 InsightConnect offers extensive automation customization, making it ideal for organizations needing flexible security workflows and modular pricing for cost-effectiveness.

Download Google Security Operations vs. Rapid7 InsightConnect Report

Pricing

Google Security Operations has no setup cost, while Rapid7 InsightConnect requires initial investment, highlighting a distinct cost difference.

View comparison

Pricing

Google Security Operations has no setup cost, while Rapid7 InsightConnect requires initial investment, highlighting a distinct cost difference.

Related categories

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)

Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)

AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms