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

DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs IBM Security QRadar comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
6.6
Number of Reviews
15
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 (47th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (46th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (19th)
IBM Security QRadar
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
218
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (6th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (2nd), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (3rd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (11th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (10th)
 

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.
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.
HarshBhardiya - PeerSpot reviewer
SOC Engineer at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Have managed daily asset and alert monitoring effectively but have encountered limitations with manual processes and interface usability
It's still very manual and doesn't work on its own. It's still in an early stage and not on par where we can consider it a really successful detection system. The accuracy is not there. The UI could be better when compared to Sentinels where we can use flags and tagging. It could be much more user-friendly. IBM Security QRadar has all features and is fully competitive with other SIEM tools, but when it comes to user-friendliness, a new user takes time to get used to it. More intuitive, user-friendly interfaces and more helpful documentation would be beneficial. The query searching and data fetching could be faster. In large to very large organizations with around 5,000 or 6,000 assets or beyond, even with proper configurations and RAM and hardware backing up, the query is fairly slow.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What I liked the most about Torq is the actual workflow builder, which is really great because they offer a lot of features and convenience features that are useful for any automation engineer."
"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."
"With Torq, I automate actions while achieving SLA compliance and streamline alert investigation processes much better."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"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."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"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."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"The response time on queries is super-fast."
"The beauty of the solution is that you can develop infrastructure for a data lake using open sources that are separate from the licenses."
"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."
"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."
"Great for scaling productivity for log monitoring purposes."
"The dashboard is helpful, and it creates visualizations to let staff review event data and identify patterns and anomalies."
"DNIF is much faster, much more responsive, and far superior when compared to competitive tools."
"Has a great search capability."
"With QRadar, you can do all these, even if you are not a security expert."
"This is a distributed application, meaning that a customer can stack small and then scale it so that they can expand pretty effectively. You can use, basically, the same product in an SMB or a large enterprise."
"The product has plenty of features and capabilities."
"It's user-friendly when compared to other products."
"We have seen a good return on investment with IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics."
"I would recommend the solution to others."
"The threat protection network is the most valuable feature because when you get an offense, you can actually trace it back to where it originated from, how it originated, and why."
"IBM has everything you need in a cybersecurity solution. If you want to build a cybersecurity operation center version then I think QRadar is a perfect solution."
 

Cons

"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"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."
"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 can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The vendor is fairly new and it's not as big as some of the international competitors. It's not a mature product. If you ask them to move data, it might take a lot of time."
"The solution should be able to connect to endpoints, such as desktops and laptops."
"We have some issues with machine learning plug-ins and I believe they're working on a solution for that."
"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."
"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."
"I feel that DNIF needs to invest more in marketing, considering that it operates at a very competitive speed."
"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."
"IBM QRadar is pricey, and therefore, usually small enterprises are not able to afford it."
"They should provide more manual examples online so that I can learn it myself."
"In a future release, the solution could provide malware analysis."
"The solution is expensive compared to other products."
"The only problem is that if you have too many events that occur, then the storage capacity becomes a problem. We would need to increase the storage capacity."
"Customer support needs some improvement as there have been a few cases where we were unable to reach them in time."
"There are several vulnerabilities that IBM is working with us on."
"While the interface is easy to use, it could be a little more responsive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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 pricing is based on the log size."
"We pay approximately $40,000 to use the solution annually. This solution is a lot less expensive than Splunk."
"When it comes to the initial pricing there can be a huge discount from there side and also I think they are open to competing with other products."
"think the pricing is quite flexible."
"It's not expensive for the resources that it gives you."
"It is expensive. It is not a product that I can provide for SMBs. It is a program that I can only provide for really large enterprises."
"There is a license required for this solution and it is an annual payment. I have found all solutions in the category to be expensive, including Splunk."
"This price is a little high, so it's an expensive product."
"It is a perpetual license that we have for the event collector. The licensing is done based on the number of events and flows that you receive on this particular device. These are perpetual licenses, which means once you purchase them, they don't expire, which means that the support to IBM is definitely renewed after every one year. We have an enterprise agreement with IBM, which puts the cost in a totally different category as compared to someone who is not an IBM partner and is approaching IBM for this solution. We were able to get massive discounts. To give you an idea, we recently purchased 30,000 event licenses, and it costs around $480,000. It is definitely not a cheap product. We have licenses for about 270,000 events per second and 3 million flows per second. All the appliances and their events and flows are basically clubbed together and charged or rather calculated through a single source. The console receives all the details from all the event processes that we have globally. So, the license that we have is a single license for 270,000 events per second and 3 million flows per second, but that can be managed centrally. I was only part of the secondary purchase, which was 30,000 events per second for about $480,000. You can calculate how much we paid for 270,000 events. Reducing its price would be a compromise. We have already used a lower-priced product in the form of NNT, but we had to get rid of it because it was not doing the job that we actually wanted to do. You get what you pay for."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
906,418 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Jun 28, 2015
Qradar vs. ArcSight
Continuing with the SIEM posts we have done at Infosecnirvana, this post is a Head to head comparison of the two Industry leading SIEM products in the market – HP ArcSight and IBM QRadar Both the products have consistently been in the Gartner Leaders Quadrant. Both HP and IBM took over niche SIEM…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
16%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business92
Midsize Enterprise39
Large Enterprise107
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
The only thing is more out-of-the-box integrations. Torq already has a lot of supported integrations and adding new o...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
For Torq, first of all, it's a hyperautomation and AI assistant usage. Our EDR SentinelOne is integrated in Torq and ...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I think I have told everything about Torq that I can share at this stage, but I am still in the process of learning t...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What are the biggest differences between Securonix UEBA, Exabeam, and IBM QRadar?
It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendli...
What SOC product do you recommend?
For tools I’d recommend: -SIEM- LogRhythm -SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Security QRadar?
I am overall satisfied with the licensing cost for IBM Security QRadar.
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Mahindra & Mahindra, Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), ICICI Bank, Yes Bank, Tata Motors, RBL Bank
Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Find out what your peers are saying about DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs. IBM Security QRadar and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
906,418 professionals have used our research since 2012.