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

Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs ThreatQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 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

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
ThreatQ
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
12th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms category, the mindshare of Group-IB Threat Intelligence is 2.9%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatQ is 2.8%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms
 

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…
Yasir Akram - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"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."
"Threat Intelligence's best feature is threat activation."
"The totality of the recordings is quite important. The networks, the new threat actors, the new methods, tactics, techniques, and procedures."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the sandbox."
"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 web intelligence could be improved. It is not as good as the intelligence from other solutions."
"Group-IB Threat Intelligence should improve integration for SIEM and SOAR solutions."
"Threat Intelligence's OT security could be improved."
"As the landscape evolves, they could provide a little more detail or specificity to map it to the MITRE ATT&CK framework."
"The lack of appliance-based or on-premise options for this solution is its biggest downfall. Clients request them often."
"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

"The pricing is alright. It's right on the mark."
"Threat Intelligence is costly, but it gives value for money."
"Group-IB Threat Intelligence's pricing is reasonable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

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 do you like most about ThreatQ?
Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy.
What needs improvement with ThreatQ?
The tool is not user-friendly. It is not beginner-friendly. It would be very difficult for a beginner to learn the tool. It will take at least two months to get familiar with it. Building the playb...
What is your primary use case for ThreatQ?
We used the solution for threat mapping and managing IoCs.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.