Same-subcategory comparison

Fortinet FortiSOARvsSplunk SOAR

Compare buyer fit, pricing, capability depth, and purchase constraints within one buying category. A higher score is not a universal winner.

Comparison summary

How to choose

These conclusions apply to this subcategory and the buyer conditions shown here. They do not make one product universally better.

Fortinet FortiSOAR

Consider when

Enterprise SOCs automating multivendor IT and OT incident response
MSSPs requiring distributed multi-tenant orchestration

Check before choosing

Buyers seeking only SIEM collection and detection
Small teams without staff to design and maintain automations

Full profile

Splunk SOAR

Consider when

Mid-market and enterprise SOCs automating repeatable incident workflows
Teams that need visual and Python playbooks across a broad security ecosystem

Check before choosing

Small production teams that will exceed Community limits but require transparent paid pricing
Organizations without security engineering capacity for connectors and playbook lifecycle management

Full profile

Dimension	Fortinet FortiSOAR	Splunk SOAR
Pricing and trial	Starter Edition Amount unverified — check official pricing Enterprise Edition Amount unverified — check official pricing Multi-Tenant FortiSOAR Amount unverified — check official pricing The official ordering guide provides edition and SKU structure but no public currency amounts. No Offer is generated. Published subscription examples prove selected one-, two- or three-year SKUs only where stated; they do not establish a universal commitment for every buyer. Full profile	Splunk SOAR Community License $0 USD · per license · Splunk SOAR On-premises Community License · no commitment · minimum 1 license · Registered users downloading Splunk SOAR On-premises Community access Splunk SOAR Amount unverified — check official pricing The free Community License has explicit operational limits. Paid standalone SOAR uses analyst-seat pricing purchased in increments of five, but Splunk does not publish a binding numeric amount, payment timing, contract duration, or renewal rate. Full profile
Best for	Enterprise SOCs automating multivendor IT and OT incident response MSSPs requiring distributed multi-tenant orchestration Regulated organizations needing hosted, self-managed, air-gapped, HA or DR options	Mid-market and enterprise SOCs automating repeatable incident workflows Teams that need visual and Python playbooks across a broad security ecosystem Organizations requiring case workbooks, roles, approvals, repositories, and audit trails
Not for	Buyers seeking only SIEM collection and detection Small teams without staff to design and maintain automations Organizations requiring a complete self-service price before technical and deployment sizing	Small production teams that will exceed Community limits but require transparent paid pricing Organizations without security engineering capacity for connectors and playbook lifecycle management Buyers seeking a lightweight workflow tool without enterprise deployment and governance overhead
Source check	99/100	99/100
Key features	Centralized alerts, cases, tasks, evidence and collaboration Visual no-code and low-code playbook development More than 700 integrations and 6,500 playbooks Cross-tool enrichment, triage, containment and remediation FortiGuard and third-party threat-intelligence workflows	More than 300 third-party integrations and more than 2,800 automated actions Visual Playbook Editor, Python code, input playbooks, logic loops, and custom functions Custom app development, testing, logs, REST API, and Python Playbook API Events, cases, workbooks, tasks, assignments, evidence, and collaboration Roles, approval groups, label and repository permissions, revisions, and audit trails
Cons	No binding public currency amount was verified Total cost varies with edition, deployment, nodes, seats, actions, storage, support, add-ons and services Unrestricted threat intelligence and added AI capacity use separate entitlements	No binding public paid amount, contract duration, payment timing, implementation, premium-support, or renewal price was verified Paid seats are purchased in increments of five and tenant counts can be separately licensed Community limits can be reached quickly because one playbook can invoke multiple licensed actions
Category buying score	83	84Higher category-fit score
Rank	#4	#3
Context	Security & Privacy / Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR) Software	Security & Privacy / Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR) Software
Automation and response depth	87Supports broad containment and remediation across multivendor systems, with operational scale governed by daily action tiers.	87Combined playbook constructs, large automated-action inventory, custom functions, and APIs allow deep orchestration of detection-to-response sequences, with practical depth still gated by licensed action volume on Community and by seat plus tenant commercial terms on paid editions.
Playbook building and maintenance	87Features visual no-code and low-code playbook builders, requiring dedicated operational staff to maintain the active automated workflow library.	90The Visual Playbook Editor plus Python authoring, input playbooks, logic loops, custom functions, testing, logs, and Playbook API give builders both low-code and code-level control for creating and maintaining automations.
Connectors and ecosystem	89More than 700 integrations and 6,500 playbooks indicate a broad connector ecosystem, but the facts do not establish continuous sync quality or integration reliability for every connector.	92More than 300 third-party integrations, more than 2,800 automated actions, custom app development, REST API, and Python interfaces provide broad connector coverage for security and IT tools, subject to each integration’s own credential and API behavior.
Case and incident operations	86Provides a consolidated workspace for tracking active security incidents, assigning tasks, and coordinating analyst work.	86Case workflows are tracked through custom tasks, roles, and evidence collection patterns.
Governance and execution security	85Approval steps and RBAC-aware execution controls support governed automation, but the score stays below the top range because the facts also require disciplined testing, permissions, and change control for autonomous response.	87Roles, approval groups, label and repository permissions, revisions, and audit trails support governed execution and oversight, while the facts do not show every compliance control or policy framework a regulated buyer may require.
Deployment, support, and total cost	55Commercials are sales-assisted with no verified public numeric starting price, and total cost moves with edition, deployment, nodes, seats, actions, storage, support, TIM, AI, and services, so procurement effort and cost predictability remain material buyer conditions.	55A free Community License enables ongoing on-premises evaluation under tight limits and paid standalone SOAR includes standard support with premium available, but the absence of a public paid amount, five-seat purchase increments, and potential separate tenant or adjacent product costs leave total cost opaque until quote.
Scale and operational analytics	81Deployment options for hosted, on-premises, public-cloud, air-gapped, HA, DR, and multi-tenant environments support scale planning, and dashboards for workload and time savings add operational visibility, but broader performance sizing depends on the quote.	78Cloud, on-premises, hybrid Automation Broker, clustering, and multi-tenant patterns plus operational dashboards support larger deployments, yet Community action, tenant, and open-case limits and separately licensed tenant counts on paid use remain explicit scale boundaries.
Full profile	Full profile	Full profile

Comparison summary

Most material score differences

These are the stored dimension rationales returned with each score. They explain the buyer conditions behind the gap without speculating about hidden model reasoning.

Playbook building and maintenance

3 pts

Fortinet FortiSOAR · 87/100: Features visual no-code and low-code playbook builders, requiring dedicated operational staff to maintain the active automated workflow library.
Splunk SOAR · 90/100: The Visual Playbook Editor plus Python authoring, input playbooks, logic loops, custom functions, testing, logs, and Playbook API give builders both low-code and code-level control for creating and maintaining automations.

Connectors and ecosystem

3 pts

Fortinet FortiSOAR · 89/100: More than 700 integrations and 6,500 playbooks indicate a broad connector ecosystem, but the facts do not establish continuous sync quality or integration reliability for every connector.
Splunk SOAR · 92/100: More than 300 third-party integrations, more than 2,800 automated actions, custom app development, REST API, and Python interfaces provide broad connector coverage for security and IT tools, subject to each integration’s own credential and API behavior.

Scale and operational analytics

3 pts

Fortinet FortiSOAR · 81/100: Deployment options for hosted, on-premises, public-cloud, air-gapped, HA, DR, and multi-tenant environments support scale planning, and dashboards for workload and time savings add operational visibility, but broader performance sizing depends on the quote.
Splunk SOAR · 78/100: Cloud, on-premises, hybrid Automation Broker, clustering, and multi-tenant patterns plus operational dashboards support larger deployments, yet Community action, tenant, and open-case limits and separately licensed tenant counts on paid use remain explicit scale boundaries.

Research basis

This page uses stored product facts, official evidence, and category scoring rationales. It is not an account-based hands-on test, and third-party user ratings are not folded into the category buying score.

Fortinet FortiSOAR: Fact confidence: 99% · Fact checked: 2026-08-10
Splunk SOAR: Fact confidence: 99% · Fact checked: 2026-08-10