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

Google Security Operations vs SECDO Platform comparison

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
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Google Security Operations
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (27th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (14th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (12th)
SECDO Platform
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (9th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (67th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Google Security Operations3.7%
Microsoft Sentinel9.8%
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR8.7%
Other77.8%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
Security Incident Response Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SECDO Platform7.0%
VMware Carbon Black Cloud9.2%
ServiceNow Security Operations9.0%
Other74.8%
Security Incident Response
 

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.
CK
Technical Lead at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Simplified detection rules and SOAR workflows have improved compliance-focused operations
One improvement I am looking for is silent log source monitoring. If some feed or some host went offline or was not pulling any logs into Google Security Operations, I would want better visibility. Silent host monitoring would make a significant difference because it is very hard to track which host went down, and there are many false positives as a result. I think there is a lot of room for scalability improvements, particularly in the integration of third-party applications. Currently, I have to write a script and use a cloud run function to pull logs. If there were direct ingestion by simply providing an API key and some sort of client certificate, it would be much easier.
it_user1643085 - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder/ CEO
Great documentation, good technical support, and very in-depth
The initial setup can be complex. I would advise users to leverage all of the access with Palo Alto, in terms of setting up with the technical account management teams. They need to ensure that what they have in mind for the product is actually going to be what happens. I have not run into any problems with deploying the product. Any of their security products are well-documented, either with open source intelligence or the documentation from Palo Alto. We had a client with less than a thousand users that received a dedicated engineer and a technical account manager that was able to walk them through the first 90 days of ownership. The support is certainly there.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"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."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"The valuable parts of Google Security Operations include how easy it is to write parsers or detection rules, and it is well-advanced in the analytical part."
"The playbooks feature in Siemplify is crucial for automation. We've utilized both standard and custom integrations with other security operation solutions, enhancing our flexibility. The user interface is generally straightforward, although recent changes may require some adjustment and Siemplify's integrations and capabilities offer potential support for various compliance requirements."
"Overall, Google SecOps is a very useful service for security operations."
"Google Security Operations helps meet all the important regulatory compliance across all verticals."
"Google SecOps is extremely useful for threat detection and hunting."
"The most valuable feature of Siemplify is the playbooks that can be created."
"Without hyperbole, I have never, in my entire career, encountered a vendor or a vendor community as awesome as Siemplify. Siemplify and the Siemplify Community quite literally made it possible for our SOC to increase almost five-fold in our number of clients and number of analysts and to go from a Monday to Friday 9-5 shop to a 24/7 shop all in the span of under a year and a half and all while continually adding capabilities and improving the services we offer to our clients."
"It basically automates the entire alert investigation process."
"The ease of deployment is a valuable feature."
"Palo Alto is extremely helpful and responsive and there is a lot of training documentation provided, making it a good, in-depth solution for enterprise clients that typically works a lot better than SIEM tools out of the box."
"Technical support is great. Palo Alto is extremely helpful and responsive."
"This is a mature product in terms of threat detection."
 

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."
"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."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"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 does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"I'm inclined to say that I'd love to see some Machine Learning capabilities integrated into the platform, however, I just attended a demo this morning where Siemplify gave a sneak peek into some Machine Learning capabilities that they are currently developing and have roadmapped for release soon."
"We often encounter minor issues that could be improved, but we maintain communication with the developers and submit feature requests. Recently, I requested enhancements such as improved search functionality within playbooks and expanded options for exporting case data."
"I can give customer service a rating of six because it is very hard sometimes to keep up with the support."
"The main improvement could be in the accuracy and detail provided in threat descriptions."
"Building the playbooks could be easier and the integration could improve. It is a difficult process, such as what API connections need to be made."
"The price of this solution is higher than the competitors."
"Maybe the notifications setting could use a simpler setting."
"The price should be reduced in order to be more competitive in the market."
"Many will try to use this as an out-of-the-box solution, however, it needs to be configured to fit what a company would like to do with it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"The price of this solution is the highest in the market, although there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Be sure of the actual number of endpoints in your company."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
University
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Performing Arts
20%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

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 Business4
Large Enterprise3
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 Siemplify?
The pricing for Google SecOps and Microsoft Sentinel is almost the same, with no significant differences.
What needs improvement with Siemplify?
One improvement I am looking for is silent log source monitoring. If some feed or some host went offline or was not p...
What is your primary use case for Siemplify?
I'm working with Google Security Operations. There is a product called Chronicle SecOps, which is a SOC tool and a SI...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Siemplify ThreatNexus
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
FedEx Mondelez Intenrational Check Point Trustwave Atos Cyberint Bae Systems Crowe Longwall Security Telefonica Nordea HCL
Valley National Bank, IDT Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR). Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.