No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cyware Cyber Fusion vs Elastic Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 2024

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

Torq
Sponsored
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Cyware Cyber Fusion
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
22nd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (30th)
Elastic Security
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (11th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (7th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (15th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.6%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cyware Cyber Fusion is 1.7%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Elastic Security is 5.1%, up from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Torq3.6%
Elastic Security5.1%
Cyware Cyber Fusion1.7%
Other89.6%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at ProArch
Automation has streamlined multi-tenant SOC workflows and improves alert handling efficiency
Although the reporting within Torq is not that great, we did ask for many features regarding reporting in Torq, but due to some platform constraints, they could not make the whole dataset available for us to be used in reporting. Except for that, we used some basic reporting. When I used Torq, it was indeed in the early stages of AI capabilities. Only a few customers were allowed to use it, and we were among them. It functioned well as long as we summarized the data properly. If you input garbage, you would get garbage out. Thus, we had to do significant fine-tuning regarding what data context we provided to the AI orchestrator to get meaningful results. In terms of Torq's unified platform approach to AI SOC automation and case management compared to managing multiple point solutions across my security stack, I find it case-centric. The unified view in case management is good since it provides clarity, although there are limitations regarding how many items in case management can be modified at once. Bulk operations are very limited, potentially due to their back-end database or data retrieval processes that can be improved. Regarding improvements for Torq, when we were onboarded, there were aspects we were uncertain about, such as the number of cases that could be generated, what data we could bring in, how many clients we could onboard, and similar concerns. Initially, we also lacked clarity about the number of playbooks or workflows we could build. Different triggers like system triggers, case-based triggers, and others can be employed without restrictions, but when it comes to on-demand and scheduled jobs, there is a limitation based on the subscription and pricing tier that notably caps the number of workflows we can create. No bulk editing across cases was one issue, along with limited filtering related to single grouping constraints. Additionally, the out-of-the-box case templates provided require substantial modifications before they become usable. There is also a feature in the cases for notes that cannot be searched. They are only visible through the UI, which is another area for improvement. The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially. I am not sure if new customers are made aware of this. It seems that workflows revolving around cases hinder functionality outside of case management, as we have many use cases needing on-demand triggers and schedules for functions like reporting or polling devices. Creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers. While they facilitate optimization and scaling, the support received tends to be very basic. Improvements can be made in that area as well.
AhmedKonsowa - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Pre-Sales Engineer (Commercial Sector) at Cyber Knight
A stable solution with excellent features and a helpful technical support team
We use the solution for cyber fusion centers The product has a lot of strong points compared to other tools. The prices must be reduced. I have been using the solution for one year. I am using the latest version of the solution. I rate the tool’s stability a nine out of ten. In my company,…
Laurentiu Popescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Product Officer at ClusterPower
Has improved threat detection with deep log analysis and streamlined investigation workflows
The most useful features I find in Elastic Security are the forensic ones that allow us to carry deeper analysis into the logs for in-depth investigations, and the dashboards, with the reporting dashboard being quite user-friendly. Elastic Security is quite good at identifying threats, as it is part of the deep investigation tool that I mentioned before. Unless we need to look further into a certain log, we can carry out a deeper analysis and forensics on those particular logs. I can assess the impact of Elastic Security's real-time data analysis on our threat response efficiency as working pretty good. We are looking for real-time analysis because we have a continuous inflow of logs from different sources: from our cloud, from Active Directory, from our network. So it works pretty well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"With Torq, I automate actions while achieving SLA compliance and streamline alert investigation processes much better."
"Under one SOC tool in Torq, analysts get to know everything within the context of an alert or incident they are working on, and this ability to view the whole picture within Torq is one of the major breakthroughs and best offerings of Torq."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Torq offers the best feature through integration with AI."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"The product is stable."
"The technical support team is helpful."
"I like the indexing of the logs."
"Elastic Security is very easy to adapt."
"The intelligence of the system has been very impressive. It's not quite AI, but the technical bit where it correlates information, based on the seen attacks within an organization is good."
"The solution is compatible with the cloud-native environment and they can adapt to it faster."
"The scalability is good. It can be scaled easily in the production environment."
"The performance is good and it is faster than IBM QRadar."
"We chose the product based on the ability to scan for malware using a malware behavioral model as opposed to just a traditional hash-based antivirus. Therefore, it's not as intensive."
"The most valuable feature is the search function, which allows me to go directly to the target to see the specific line a customer is searching for."
 

Cons

"The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially, and creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"Additionally, the documentation for Torq is not very clear. Most of the information is presented in videos, which are not ideal for reading; there are mostly paragraphs and other text-based content."
"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."
"There are some issues and bugs that I think need to be fixed, but they are currently not focused on it."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"However, we did encounter some problems with custom steps, which definitely affected our progress, and the speed of bug fixes is also a bit slower than expected."
"The tool doesn't integrate well with ServiceNow."
"The prices must be reduced."
"We are paying dearly for the guy who is working on the ELK Stack. That knowledge is quite rare and hard to come by. For difficulty and availability of resources, I would rate it a five out of 10."
"There isn't really a very good user experience. You need a lot of training."
"We find that solutions such as Dynatrace and Datadog offer much more functionality, perhaps due to the fact that they are more mature."
"The training that is offered for Elastic is in need of improvement because there is no depth to it."
"We'd like better premium support."
"Authentication is not a default in Kibana. We need to have another tool to have authentication and authorization. These two should be part of Kibana."
"I want to find an automatic security system in the tool, like a SOAR solution. I am looking forward to seeing a SOAR system in the tool."
"Configuring the server is difficult and can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"It is easy to deploy, easy to use, and you get everything you need to become operational with it, and have nothing further to pay unless you want the OLED plugin."
"We use the open-source version, so there is no charge for this solution."
"I find it better than Splunk in terms of cost-effectiveness. For cost-effectiveness, I would rate it a nine out of 10."
"The product offers an amazing pricing structure. Price-wise, the product is very competitive."
"Its price is fine. Its licensing works on a yearly basis. We have to renew the license every year. I also have a good experience with Darktrace. When we buy Darktrace, we get training free of cost, which is not there in Elastic. We have to pay extra for training. There is certainly room for improvement."
"The base product is open-source but if you need advanced security features then you need to pay for the subscription. Elastic Security's price is reasonable in some cases and in other cases it's not."
"When compared to other products, the price is average or on the low side."
"The tool's pricing is flexible and comes at unit cost. You don't have to pay for everything."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Comms Service Provider
19%
Healthcare Company
11%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise11
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business40
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
Torq can be improved by adding some more features, such as adding more automation and providing a no-code option so I...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is reviewing the incidents and responding to them. After that, I investigate them and take ...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would definitely recommend others to use Torq as it is an all-rounder tool which even integrates AI. As we all know...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Datadog vs ELK: which one is good in terms of performance, cost and efficiency?
With Datadog, we have near-live visibility across our entire platform. We have seen APM metrics impacted several time...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Elastic Security?
I am satisfied with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing cost. It is a pure 10.
What needs improvement with Elastic Security?
I do not have any specific recommendations for improvements in Elastic Security, but I feel that the AI module should...
 

Also Known As

No data available
CSOL, Fusion and Threat Response, Threat Intelligence eXchange, Security Orchestration and Automation (SOAR)
Elastic SIEM, ELK Logstash
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Texas A&M, U.S. Air Force, NuScale Power, Martin's Point Health Care
Find out what your peers are saying about Cyware Cyber Fusion vs. Elastic Security and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.