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

DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs Fortinet FortiSOAR 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
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
DNIF HYPERCLOUD
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
28th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (46th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (46th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (19th)
Fortinet FortiSOAR
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.8%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of DNIF HYPERCLOUD is 1.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiSOAR is 3.7%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Torq3.8%
Fortinet FortiSOAR3.7%
DNIF HYPERCLOUD1.6%
Other90.9%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at Swimlane
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.
Kishore Tiwari - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy General Manager - Information Security (Lead ISA) at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Development from open sources is very valuable but a huge infrastructure is required
The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used. The search configuration is a bit different than other OEMs or SIEM solutions like ArcSight or QRadar that are easy to search because they operate similarly. The logic is there and the solution supplies a pretty good explanation. Basically, DNIF spelled out is the opposite of FIND. You have to find commands whenever you want to search something. For example, a highway gets you to your destination but there is an alternate way people don't yet know about. Gartner or Forrester haven't yet studied it. We were a bit nervous when we were trying to get familiar with the solution. We wondered if we could realize ROI because the commands and ways of pulling data were different to us. We raised a case with the support team and their professionals provided the needed support. The command line is user friendly once you understand it. If you need immediate use, then you might want to get assistance from someone who is well-versed in methods for using key patterns to find things. Lengthier files for threat hunting or analysis are needed. The correlation happens, but exporting a large number of files to abstract them is not possible. For example, I want to present raw data to management so I should be able to customize a date range in my query and download the files.
VIJAICYRIAC - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at Movate
Automated playbooks have reduced response times and provided deeper threat analytics
The effectiveness of Fortinet FortiSOAR playbooks is that they minimize the mean time to response and MTTR, and I think more automation is required to improve the response time. I am working with the Dynamic Case Management feature, and it is dynamic. The Dynamic Case Management feature is more helpful for us to get real-time anomalies and identify the threats. It also assists in real-time response, so it is helpful.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"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."
"The beauty of the solution is that you can develop infrastructure for a data lake using open sources that are separate from the licenses."
"It was one of the first SIEM tools I saw that had that particular MITRE table."
"The benefit of DNIF was that the solution was able to detect any anomalies and identify and prevent any possible security threats or attacks."
"If you're an enterprise company and want to scale your productivity for log monitoring purposes, I found DNIF a better option than Splunk which has more complex software."
"I like the MITRE table, a feature I saw for the first time in the same solution. There was one MITRE tactic table, which can be used to identify threats if you have all kinds of rules enabled or if you have rules for all the tactics in the MITRE table. There are 14 tables in MITRE, and those 14 tables consist of multiple columns, tactics, and techniques. It was one of the first SIEM tools I saw that had that particular MITRE table. On that basis, you can create new rules and identify existing ones. At any point, if an alert is triggered, it will try to match it to any of those MITRE tactics. I liked that creating a workbook on MITRE business was straightforward. I also like that you can search using SQL or DQL."
"The solution is quite stable and offers good performance, it also works on a virtual machine and we haven't found any issues with it so far, it's been reliable."
"DNIF is much faster, much more responsive, and far superior when compared to competitive tools."
"Great for scaling productivity for log monitoring purposes."
"The solution has many connectors, which is quite helpful."
"The fabrication, management, and communication across a single platform is beautiful."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is its centralization as you don't want to be going to different locations to correlate items or to piece anything together to derive meaningful insights."
"The solution automates everything using the playbooks and pre-deployed response mitigation scenarios."
"My final rating for Fortinet FortiSOAR would be 10 out of 10, where one is bad and ten is good."
"I like that the solution is integrated with FortiAnalyzer, it's the best feature."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiSOAR is the number of available connectors and the simplicity to start to automate."
 

Cons

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"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."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"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."
"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."
"The solution should be able to connect to endpoints, such as desktops and laptops... If this solution had a smart connector to these logs- Windows, Linux, or any other logs - without affecting the performance of the connector, that would be wonderful."
"We have some issues with machine learning plug-ins and I believe they're working on a solution for that."
"The EBA could be improved."
"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."
"DNIF HYPERCLOUD is not a stable product compared to other tools like IBM QRadar."
"I used version 8 which was not at all stable. The services and processor keep going down, we had to manually keep them up increasing storage space because services are down, and logs not processed."
"I think DNIF HYPERCLOUD can implement the ability to export more than 100,000. At the moment, we can't go beyond that. So many times, if you're checking for the firewall logs and working on something related to authentication or network-related traffic, while that log count is low, the account goes beyond that. You can't restrict the logs or the amount of data you can export. It's very important for my situation. It would be better if they could increase the capacity of exports. Although there are many more types of searching in DNIF HYPERCLOUD, people still struggle to query out what they want because not everyone is good at SQL or DQL. The easiest way to query out in DNIF is using the GUI-based interface. But in the GUI interface, you can use operator calls. It gets tricky when you want to search for a specific type of event. You don't know where it will be passed and whether it will be consistent. In the initial phase, it's tough for us to use DNIF. You cannot pass every event in a stable DNIF. When we used that particular tool, we used to get those logs, but sometimes many things are not getting passed. So, we used to export the sheet or export the data into Excel and weigh the required details. In the next release, I would like them to improve the export of the columns and make the application more user-friendly. I would also like a threat-hunting feature in the next release."
"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR's dashboard is not easy to understand."
"The tool's user interface is an area of concern where improvements are needed."
"Fortinet is good, however, as they get into security analytics, while their support is okay, sometimes it requires some hand-holding and their response is probably not as good as Palo Alto."
"The ease of playbook creation on FortiSOAR needs improvement."
"FortiSOAR needs to improve the response time for executing playbooks."
"The licensing model could be better."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing is based on the log size."
"The solution requires a huge infrastructure and that is costly."
"Price-wise, the product is quite economical. I rate the solution's price as three or four on a scale of one to ten, where one is considered to be a very economically priced tool."
"The price of the product should be lower. The brand value that Fortinet has, it has the reputation of being a reasonably priced product, and they have an enormous customer base in India. Most of the SME market is covered by FortiGate firewalls. It becomes an easy way for consultants, such as us, or even system integrators, to open the door with the Fortinet product lines."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is expensive."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is an expensive solution."
"Since Africa is struggling with foreign exchange, the solution is pretty expensive there."
"Pricing is fine compared to other solutions."
"The solution offers both licensing and subscription models that are similar in price to other products."
"Considering all the features of Fortinet FortiSOAR, I think it has a good price."
"If you compare Fortinet FortiSOAR's price with the prices of the market leader, Palo Alto, then it can be considered a cheaper product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
I do not dislike anything about Torq because it has satisfied all of our use cases and requirements. We contacted sup...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
Initially, we were using Slack for small automations, such as creating pipelines or shutting down servers. For exampl...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I have been working for five years with experience in the IT field. Torq is very good. It manages everything. I would...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortinet FortiSOAR?
The product is expensive, but it is a value-for-money product. It is a good product to invest in, eventually securing...
What needs improvement with Fortinet FortiSOAR?
Fortinet FortiSOAR has to be updated on the recent threats. Threats are changing, and it has to be updated to meet th...
What is your primary use case for Fortinet FortiSOAR?
I have been working in my field for almost four years, but right now I am not using it because my current company is ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
CyberSponse, FortiSOAR
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Mahindra & Mahindra, Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), ICICI Bank, Yes Bank, Tata Motors, RBL Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs. Fortinet FortiSOAR and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.