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

Fortinet FortiSOAR vs ThreatQ 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
6.7
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Fortinet FortiSOAR
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
8th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatQ
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
25th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.8%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiSOAR is 3.8%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatQ is 1.4%, up from 1.1% 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 FortiSOAR3.8%
ThreatQ1.4%
Other91.0%
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.
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.
Yasir Akram - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at Freelancer
Good reporting and pretty stable but needs to be simpler to use
The support team of ThreatQ set up a VM on our VPN, which was SlashNext's private VPN. Then we just initiated some system calls and ThreatQ provided us the configuration file with our settings (like our email, our API key, our URL, our category, etc.). They set up a VM on our private VPN cloud. And then they provided us the configuration file in which we just entered our details like our company URL, our API category, and API keys et cetera. We could just add it on the configuration file. We just uploaded it to the ThreatQ server. After running the system calls, we just initiated the ThreatQ and then performed tasks on the UI, such as categorizing the reports. If we only wanted the report for phishing, then we just manipulated the data on the UI and just extracted the reports. That's all. The deployment was complex. We used high hardware specifications. I don't remember the exact specifications, however, I recall them being high. There were some services that had some compatibility errors. That's why we had our VMs - to make sure that the customer would not face any errors. Everything's deployed with high specifications and custom specifications. That was the biggest challenge for us - to deploy on the customer VMs. On average, deployment takes 15-20 minutes if it's deployed without any errors. I was with one of the NetOps network admin during deployment. We were only two people and we just deployed and installed all services and we executed the deployment.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"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."
"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."
"If I review about 100 vendors that I might work with, Torq is definitely in the top five that gave me personally investment back, just because every bit of effort I put into Torq eventually became a workflow that gave it back to me."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"The solution has many connectors, which is quite helpful."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The playbook and the dashboard of FortiSOAR are really informative."
"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 reputation of the brand is very good."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is a very interactive and user-friendly solution."
"The product can be automated for network security purposes. The solution offers a great security automation response."
"It has a quick detection and response time."
"The reporting services are great. With reporting services, if you have customers that just visit a URL you can see the result - including why it's blocked and how and how the URL was first recognized as malicious."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
 

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."
"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."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"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."
"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."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"The solution doesn't connect well with the network devices, with FortiNAC. It's also a very expensive product and I've found that the Fortinet engineers don't have much experience with the product and they require training, particularly when dealing with enterprise organizations."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR's dashboard is not easy to understand."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"We need more fine-tuning for ChatGPT, especially when creating connectors."
"Fortinet's tech support overall is not great when they are at their best."
"I have found that Fortinet FortiSOAR needs a lot of improvement. The orchestration needs to be improved and most of its functionalities are yet to be operational, I have tried to click on the icons but they do not work."
"The tool's user interface is an area of concern where improvements are needed."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR should add more documentation for some use cases."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution offers both licensing and subscription models that are similar in price to other products."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is expensive."
"Since Africa is struggling with foreign exchange, the solution is pretty expensive there."
"If you compare Fortinet FortiSOAR's price with the prices of the market leader, Palo Alto, then it can be considered a cheaper product."
"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."
"Pricing is fine compared to other solutions."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is an expensive solution."
"Considering all the features of Fortinet FortiSOAR, I think it has a good price."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
899,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
No data available
 

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...
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 ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
CyberSponse, FortiSOAR
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet FortiSOAR vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
899,204 professionals have used our research since 2012.