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

D3 Security vs NetWitness NDR 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
17
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
D3 Security
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
21st
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (11th), AI-Powered Security Automation (6th)
NetWitness NDR
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (49th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (34th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (59th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (20th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (41st)
 

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 D3 Security is 2.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetWitness NDR is 1.8%, up from 0.6% 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%
D3 Security2.2%
NetWitness NDR1.8%
Other92.4%
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.
Muhammad Aamir Riaz - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager Security Operation Center at The Bank of Punjab
Offers open API for integrating any available tools without any recurring costs
Before committing, I recommend a Proof of Concept (POC) or demo first. This way, you can see if the product aligns with your specific use cases and security needs. Knowledge transfer is key, and D3 Security's team excels in this area. During the POC, your analysts gain valuable product knowledge, putting them ahead of the curve for deployment. In our case, the learning curve was steep initially, but by the end of the POC, my team was already building playbooks independently. D3 Security also schedules dedicated knowledge transfer sessions during the POC, making it a win-win for both parties. Since technology transfer is crucial for government entities like ours, this approach eliminates the need for additional learning after deployment, unlike with certain competitors like the Fortinet FortiSOAR case. While Fortinet FortiSOAR achieved the desired tasks, its knowledge transfer process was lacking, leaving us with a shaky foundation. D3 Security's approach solidifies the learning and empowers our team. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
reviewer1799727 - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager, IT Security Operations at a non-profit with 11-50 employees
Reliable and good support but can be expensive
I have no real complaints about the solution. Threat detection could be better. They need to enhance their threat intelligence feeds. We would like to have more IOCs or more trade intelligence to not only rely on the intelligence of the engineer in charge but to have some threat intelligence and some seeds of IOCs and to have the host have some artificial intelligence to reduce the number of false positives. I don't see this solution being very scalable. The solution is pricey.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"Torq offers the best feature through integration with AI."
"Since we started working with Torq, I am handling much fewer alerts, it is becoming really easy for me to handle an alert, I have all the information that I need, I do not need to connect to different vendors to receive this information, and the main thing I got from Torq is time, which now helps me to build another automated system and learn."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"We have seen fewer failures of automations from the time Torq came into the picture, we've had a more streamlined process of handling incidents, and at the same time, we've learned to embed the AI into our incident types, and that is how it has helped us in the automation."
"Torq has exceeded expectations by delivering workflows in a timely and lower effort manner than XSOAR, and it meets all my needs while saving a ton of time and targeting $600,000 saved this year, which is a substantial amount of money."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"It is an out-of-the-box automated integration with our 20 departments. We perform L1 LiveOps automatically through the portal."
"The solution's valuable feature is its GUI. It has more than 450 connectors, which are excellent for connecting devices and automating integration. The solution has all the features we need. We deployed it in our environment, and it's fully integrated. Thanks to their open APIs, the seamless integration makes everything work well together."
"It is stable. We have been using it for some time, without any issues."
"Technical support is knowledgeable."
"The stability of the RSA NetWitness Endpoint is very good."
"NetWitness Endpoint has enabled us to detect attacks that bypass the first stage of cybersecurity, like zero-day and advanced attacks."
"I would highly recommend the solution. Just go ahead and get it."
"This solution allows us to locate the malware in real-time."
"The log correlation is good."
"The most valuable feature is the way it captures the traffic, and it contains every detail of the communication."
 

Cons

"I wish Torq's AI assistant for building templated workflows from scratch worked better; when you start with a blank slate, asking AI to help you build or template the workflow out does not go well."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"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."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"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."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"Reporting needs improvement. MTTR and MTTD metrics aren't directly available in playbooks and require manual effort to achieve."
"The reporting, especially custom reporting, needs to be improved. Additionally, it would be better if it could be hosted on Linux."
"Threat detection could be better."
"The contamination feature could be improved."
"Its price could be improved. It is an expensive product. Its training is also too expensive. It would be great if they can have a better pricing scheme for the training."
"The solution is modular, for example you can buy the RSA ePack, which you buy as a module is not part of the conduit solution. They could include it and have it as an all-in-one solution."
"The integration of the solution needs to be improved. The dashboard needs lots of updates as well. In the next release, we would like to see advanced fraud detection features."
"One of the drawbacks of using this product is that when you deploy, you have to create MSI files."
"The deployment process is complex. I don't know why, but this solution will suddenly stop working. Logs stop coming. Often, one thing or another stops working. Most of the time, one of my team members is working with troubleshooting and working with technical support. Log passing is also one of the biggest challenge."
"The solution doesn't have a reporting engine which would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"NetWitness Endpoint is less costly than its competitors, but it offers fewer features."
"It is highly scalable. It can be bought based on your requirements."
"They can easily adjust if you have the requirements which are required. If you have a budget cut or a budget constraint, they can bend."
"I do not have any opinion on the pricing or licensing of the product."
"It is an expensive product."
"We are on a three-year contract to use RSA NetWitness Network."
"The cost depends on the number of endpoints that you want to monitor, but it is not expensive."
"The pricing is not very economical. It is a quite costly product for India. One thing is that when you purchase it, you have to purchase a module separately."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
909,701 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
9%
Comms Service Provider
25%
Computer Software Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise6
 

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
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
RSA ECAT, NetWitness Network
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
S&P Global, Scotiabank, Cybereason, Cummins
ADP, Ameritas, Partners Healthcare
Find out what your peers are saying about D3 Security vs. NetWitness NDR and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.