Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs ThreatBook comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 31, 2025

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

Group-IB Threat Intelligence
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatBook
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
16th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Network Detection and Response (NDR) (14th)
 

Featured Reviews

Abdelrahman Hussein - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to setup, highly stable and scalable and efficiently tracks threat actors and analyze their tactics
We use Group-IB Threat Intelligence to help us with threat hunting, incident response, and vulnerability management We have found the site intelligence features to be the most valuable. We are able to use these features to track threat actors and analyze their tactics, techniques, and procedures…
RG
Enhancement in incident response through reduced false positives and contextual intelligence
ThreatBook has positively impacted our organization by allowing us to detect all alerts and threats effectively. In the past, we needed to search logs from various sources, including terminals, DI servers, and firewalls, collecting a lot of logs and searching the internet for contextual information about threat actors. After using ThreatBook TDP, all alerts and contexts are easily displayed on the dashboard, making it very helpful for us. During the incident response scenario, ThreatBook saves us over 80% of the time for each incident. We usually took about one day or two days for attribution and understanding how the attacker attacked us, but after using ThreatBook TDP, we usually take around one or two hours to finish all these tasks. Additionally, their AI techniques save a lot of time, allowing me to ask in natural language for explanations about the meaning and target of the attacker.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Threat Intelligence's best feature is threat activation."
"The most valuable Group-IB Threat Intelligence features are their detections, especially in terms of account and card information leakage. This data sets Group-IB apart from some of the competition."
"We have found the site intelligence features to be the most valuable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the sandbox."
"The totality of the recordings is quite important. The networks, the new threat actors, the new methods, tactics, techniques, and procedures."
"ThreatBook saves us over 80% of the time for each incident."
"ThreatBook saves us over 80% of time for each incident, reducing the usual time taken from one or two days for attribution to just one or two hours, thanks to their AI techniques."
 

Cons

"Group-IB Threat Intelligence should improve integration for SIEM and SOAR solutions."
"The lack of appliance-based or on-premise options for this solution is its biggest downfall. Clients request them often."
"As the landscape evolves, they could provide a little more detail or specificity to map it to the MITRE ATT&CK framework."
"The web intelligence could be improved. It is not as good as the intelligence from other solutions."
"Threat Intelligence's OT security could be improved."
"It would be great if ThreatBook could integrate with our ITSM system to streamline the tasks and incident management"
"We’ve seen strong ROI through reduced incident response times, increased threat visibility, and less time wasted on false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Group-IB Threat Intelligence's pricing is reasonable."
"The pricing is alright. It's right on the mark."
"Threat Intelligence is costly, but it gives value for money."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Group-IB Threat Intelligence?
We have found the site intelligence features to be the most valuable.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Group-IB Threat Intelligence?
The pricing is alright. It's right on the mark. It costs money, but it's not too high. It's reasonable. For me, it's a reasonable price for the quality of the product.
What needs improvement with Group-IB Threat Intelligence?
As the landscape evolves, they could provide a little more detail or specificity to map it to the MITRE ATT&CK framework. Even though it is done in the report, it could be done better.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatBook?
The procurement process is easy because ThreatBook is a subscription model, and when I need it, I just pay for it. The billing experience is clear with no extra fees; all the costs are clearly show...
What needs improvement with ThreatBook?
It would be great if ThreatBook could integrate with our ITSM system to streamline the tasks and incident management, and I hope this feature will be provided in the future. Everything is perfect, ...
What is your primary use case for ThreatBook?
Mainly, we use ThreatBook TDP to monitor the east-west and north-south network traffic, detect abnormal behaviors, and provide contextual intelligence to support our threat hunting and incident res...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs. ThreatBook and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.