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

Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs Recorded Future comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

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 AutoFocus
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Recorded Future
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Digital Risk Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is 1.3%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Recorded Future is 16.9%, down from 19.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

RichPhillips - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers a centralized dashboard for reporting threats and anomalies
The tool along with other suite of products provides us with threat and alert information.  The solution has provided us with a centralized dashboard for reporting threats and anomalies.  I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security.  I…
Dr. Merrick Watchorn - PeerSpot reviewer
Traceless online searches, stable, and scalable
There is a semantic oncology dynamic relationship between how the MIGR Tech framework needs more data infusion enrichment capabilities. To be clear, what the vendor is doing is of a high standard, and my only critique is that they need to make new enhancements. I am aware that the vendor is making a concerted effort to add additional information to their repository, and it is something they actively do. The vendor has publicly stated that they will work on this, and I always pay attention to make sure they adhere to that. This does not change over time. The export feature of the recording needs to stop being so restricted. When they record in order to save themselves by operations, I would expect that as a super user, if I asked to download the dataset I'm looking for, I would not be limited in my data downloads. One of the cool things is, let's say we do our entire research and we want to save all of the materials that were returned, and that special custom search that we made, we can export that into a CSV file. The problem is it gets restricted. So sometimes when I say it's restricted, we don't get all the data that we saw online. So then we have to go and manually search for the specific thing we're looking for. I would like to have the URI and whatever value set that I search off, and for the NLP package to not be stripped out. It's like saying I want to do a Pcap analysis. Don't strip out the Pcap when I asked to see Pcap. That's what they're doing. They do this for many different reasons. One of them is, imagine if everyone downloaded datasets that are very large and it brings the whole system down.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is alerting."
"The logs play a crucial role as they contribute to blocking unwanted Internet traffic."
"I would rate Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus a ten out of ten."
"The feature that I like best is the dashboard."
"It integrates well with other solutions and provides good threat intelligence in terms of external threats."
"I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security."
"It can collect data from various sources, including social media and the dark web."
"Recorded Future has some important strengths. It has a long history of success in the market and is known for excellent threat intelligence. Its team is skilled at using AI to search for and report on threats. For many years, it was seen as the best in the industry."
"The solution is diverse and provides me with a lot of different mechanisms for evaluation."
"The intel that they were providing us over the emails was very good. If it found any hashtag in our organization's name on the dark web, a rogue IP, or a marketplace, it would send us an email and notify us that this is being mentioned, and if we want, they can take some action."
"The tool is helpful in vulnerability assessment of zero-day vulnerabilities and phishing domains. The solution provides information on any domains of the organization that has undergone phishing or any other cyberattacks."
"The most valuable feature of Recorded Future is how it detects everything regarding our domain."
"Recorded Future allows me to maintain very accurate alerts."
"The most valuable features of Recorded Future are the useful alerts it provides. If we are monitoring a domain, the solution will provide us with an alert in a prompt manner. It is simple for clients to receive alerts. The advanced search is useful for more accurate filter results."
 

Cons

"It is a completely cloud-based product at present."
"It would be better if they used the threat intelligence feeds directly from their side and changing the verdict instead of us requesting it."
"It would be helpful to have better documentation for configuring and installing the solution."
"I would like the tool to see more integration with Cortex XDR. There is no real reason to keep them separate."
"I would like to have more technical documentation that contains greater detail on the types of threats that are occurring."
"The solution could improve in reducing the false positives. However, most of the other tools on the market have false positives. If they enhance their data algorithm, it could improve the accuracy of results and minimize false positives. Identifying patterns of false possibilities can aid in developing better reporting features that could potentially eliminate them in the future. This recording feature tool could benefit from adopting similar techniques utilized by other tools to enhance its functionality. By doing so, it could minimize the need for manual efforts in distinguishing true positives from false positives, ultimately reducing the workload."
"The solution would benefit from introducing automation."
"There is a semantic oncology dynamic relationship between how the MIGR Tech framework needs more data infusion enrichment capabilities."
"The product gives many false positives. If someone talks about the brand or organization name in the public domain over chats or blocks, it gets highlighted. It may not necessarily be a threat but still gets highlighted which increases the false positive count."
"Recorded Future is a very expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
"At present, my clients need to be trained by me or another organization on how to use Recorded Future and how to get the best out of it as an analyst, engineer, and administrator. It would be better if clients could directly learn these things without having to go through me or other organizations."
"It sometimes detects false positives and reduces the overall accuracy of the system."
"When you add one website to Recorded Future, it should automatically call all other websites and social media platforms."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is reasonably priced."
"It is expensive."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing a seven out of ten."
"The price of the solution is worth it. The overall performance of the solution outweighs the cost."
"The biggest disadvantage of Recorded Future is the cost here in Eastern Europe. The solution is correctly priced for big companies who have the money to invest in such solutions. Also, the solution is useless on its own, which means that you have to invest in other solutions with which Recorded Future can be integrated. At present, Recorded Future can cost 60,000 euros per year. I am able to offer my clients a 5% to 10% discount, but in this region, the cost is still prohibitive even with the discount. If Recorded Future were more flexible in terms of price, there would be better sales opportunities in Europe and Eastern Europe, in particular, because we have more small- and medium-sized companies here."
"There appear to be up to five different levels, with the most expensive version costing around $95,000 to $105,000 a year for subscription services."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
856,856 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
I am impressed with the tool's integration of Palo Alto products which serves as a platform for security.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
While Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus is effective, I always prefer to have a second source of threat intelligence feed to ensure coverage for zero-day vulnerabilities that might be missed. This is mo...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus?
I use Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus ( /products/palo-alto-networks-autofocus-reviews ) for threat intelligence. Palo Alto Networks has its own threat intelligence team, Unit 42, which analyzes submi...
What do you like most about Recorded Future?
The most valuable feature of Recorded Future is how it detects everything regarding our domain.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Recorded Future?
I am not the person responsible for purchases, but it's known that Recorded Future is expensive, with a personal rating of eight for cost.
What needs improvement with Recorded Future?
Their research capabilities and the human aspect should be more effective. The Insikt Group covers a narrow range of areas, which doesn't reflect my needs. Their research should be wider and more i...
 

Also Known As

Palo Alto Threat Intelligence Management
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Telkom Indonesia
Fujitsu, Regions, SITA, St. Jude Medical, Accenture, T-Mobile, TIAA, Intel Security, Armor, Alert Logic, NTT, Splunk
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks AutoFocus vs. Recorded Future and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
856,856 professionals have used our research since 2012.