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

Dawnguard vs UnderDefense comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 AI-Powered Security Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st)
Dawnguard
Ranking in AI-Powered Security Automation
14th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
UnderDefense
Ranking in AI-Powered Security Automation
4th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (22nd), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (10th), SOC as a Service (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (10th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (15th), Compliance Management (10th), AI-SOC (8th)
 

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.
Use Dawnguard?
Leave a review
Ivan Voitovych - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at Urlicer
AI-driven SOC triage has transformed threat monitoring and keeps our security work focused
The best features UnderDefense offers include mostly triage in-context signals read together across my stack, where one finding replaces many separate checks. A good thing too is its false positive suppression, as I do not get false notifications. Normal activity such as traffic spikes during customer events is recognized and documented, and only the unusual cases reach me. It has full-time support 24/7 with proactive reports, and monitoring runs around the clock. Reports and alerts come to me without even noticing or asking, so it is very useful. My team sees what happened without having to chase it. I find the proactive reporting and 24/7 support to have definitely made a real difference. Proactive reports mean I hear about what happened without having to ask, so I know the state of things at the start of the day, and 24/7 support matters most for traffic spikes and other events outside busy working hours, as I get an answer when I need one without keeping someone on call just in case, saving me a lot of time. Together, they let my team stay on infrastructure work and step in only when a decision is needed. Regarding UnderDefense's AI capabilities, I think the governance and security is the best there is, as the decisions that matter stay with my team and each finding is documented, allowing me to review afterwards how a conclusion was reached. That control and traceability is what I need from AI in a security role. The accuracy and reliability of UnderDefense's AI output is accurate and steady, as findings have matched what I saw when I checked them, and the pattern assessments are consistent, especially during large traffic events or spikes, which is when I depend on them most. When a case needs judgment, the reasoning is there so I can confirm it myself.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which AI-Powered Security Automation solutions are best for your needs.
920,223 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
No data available
Manufacturing Company
39%
Construction Company
13%
Security Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise13
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it ...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is for managing IT services and providing faster response.
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would rate Torq a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I chose this rating because customer service is excellent. I suggest to...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your primary use case for UnderDefense?
Our main use case for UnderDefense Agentic AI SOC is to watch how accounts actually use our platform. Our product is ...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Kyte, Betsson Grourp, Mammut, Accedian.
Find out what your peers are saying about Torq, Tines, Swimlane and others in AI-Powered Security Automation. Updated: October 2026.
920,223 professionals have used our research since 2012.