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

Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Portal vs Recorded Future comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 9, 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

Kaspersky Threat Intelligen...
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
20th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Recorded Future
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Digital Risk Protection (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) category, the mindshare of Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Portal is 1.4%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Recorded Future is 7.1%, down from 17.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Recorded Future7.1%
Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Portal1.4%
Other91.5%
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
 

Featured Reviews

Abdelrahman Hussein - PeerSpot reviewer
CTI & Threat Hunter at Telecom Egypt
Provides useful real-time threat intelligence features but has limited capabilities
We use the product to search for IoCs. It is a good tool, but we do not use all its capabilities. We have only done a POC of the product. The real-time threat intelligence features are useful. The tool has good capabilities. It has a database of IoCs The solution is limited. I have been using…
Derek  Lewis - PeerSpot reviewer
Account Manager at Chevron
Continuous threat intelligence has improved brand monitoring and protects against leaked credentials
Some of the areas that need improvement in Recorded Future include email reports that can show unrelated content. Sometimes alerts pop up for articles that have been published years ago but were just recently discovered by Recorded Future. For the browser extension, since the main purpose is to present information regarding IPs, I think it would be best to provide us with an idea of where the IP originates or some additional information about the organization it belongs to. API capabilities in Recorded Future are improving, but there are still some features that are missing and some errors that are hard to handle and understand. The price of Recorded Future is a bit high, especially for smaller teams working on a tight budget, but it is very effective and relatively competitive for large organizations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution improved our overall security posture."
"The real-time threat intelligence features are useful."
"Recorded Future has some important strengths. It has a long history of success in the market and is known for excellent threat intelligence. Its team is skilled at using AI to search for and report on threats. For many years, it was seen as the best in the industry."
"The most valuable feature of Recorded Future is how it detects everything regarding our domain."
"The most valuable features of Recorded Future are the useful alerts it provides. If we are monitoring a domain, the solution will provide us with an alert in a prompt manner. It is simple for clients to receive alerts. The advanced search is useful for more accurate filter results."
"As a threat intelligence tool, it's very helpful."
"It can collect data from various sources, including social media and the dark web."
"The intel that they were providing us over the emails was very good. If it found any hashtag in our organization's name on the dark web, a rogue IP, or a marketplace, it would send us an email and notify us that this is being mentioned, and if we want, they can take some action."
"The tool is helpful in vulnerability assessment of zero-day vulnerabilities and phishing domains. The solution provides information on any domains of the organization that has undergone phishing or any other cyberattacks."
"I have seen a return on investment as I explained earlier, it reduces the investigation time from days to minutes, and that is the biggest ROI; on a team of ten people that use it, one request can take you from three days to minutes."
 

Cons

"The solution is limited."
"More insights would be helpful. We have multiple solutions for threat intelligence. If someone has a bigger view or full eye on all the incidents, it will be beneficial."
"At present, my clients need to be trained by me or another organization on how to use Recorded Future and how to get the best out of it as an analyst, engineer, and administrator. It would be better if clients could directly learn these things without having to go through me or other organizations."
"The price of Recorded Future is a bit high, especially for smaller teams working on a tight budget, but it is very effective and relatively competitive for large organizations."
"While I don't think the tool is weak, its position isn't as dominant as it once was. Other companies like CrowdStrike and Mandiant are now challenging them in many areas. One downside is that Recorded Future can be complex for customers to use and understand. This isn't easy for clients to navigate."
"Recorded Future is a very expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
"We can get the data of different malware active throughout the globe, but it would be good if we can do sandboxing of a file. For example, on Any Run, we can perform sandboxing of malware along with their intel about a particular file or hash. It would be great if they have a feature like that."
"There is a semantic oncology dynamic relationship between how the MIGR Tech framework needs more data infusion enrichment capabilities."
"Lacks sufficient visibility of malware and international APT attacks."
"The solution could improve in reducing the false positives. However, most of the other tools on the market have false positives. If they enhance their data algorithm, it could improve the accuracy of results and minimize false positives. Identifying patterns of false possibilities can aid in developing better reporting features that could potentially eliminate them in the future. This recording feature tool could benefit from adopting similar techniques utilized by other tools to enhance its functionality. By doing so, it could minimize the need for manual efforts in distinguishing true positives from false positives, ultimately reducing the workload."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There appear to be up to five different levels, with the most expensive version costing around $95,000 to $105,000 a year for subscription services."
"The biggest disadvantage of Recorded Future is the cost here in Eastern Europe. The solution is correctly priced for big companies who have the money to invest in such solutions. Also, the solution is useless on its own, which means that you have to invest in other solutions with which Recorded Future can be integrated. At present, Recorded Future can cost 60,000 euros per year. I am able to offer my clients a 5% to 10% discount, but in this region, the cost is still prohibitive even with the discount. If Recorded Future were more flexible in terms of price, there would be better sales opportunities in Europe and Eastern Europe, in particular, because we have more small- and medium-sized companies here."
"The price of the solution is worth it. The overall performance of the solution outweighs the cost."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing a seven out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) solutions are best for your needs.
896,099 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Healthcare Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise12
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Services?
More insights would be helpful. We have multiple solutions for threat intelligence. If someone has a bigger view or full eye on all the incidents, it will be beneficial. So, to include everything i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Services?
For the business side, it's a great solution. The solution improved our overall security posture. I would recommend using it. It has a lot of information, monitors for Dark Web Services, data leaka...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Recorded Future?
The price of Recorded Future is a bit high, especially for smaller teams working on a tight budget, but it is very effective and relatively competitive for large organizations.
What needs improvement with Recorded Future?
Some of the areas that need improvement in Recorded Future include email reports that can show unrelated content. Sometimes alerts pop up for articles that have been published years ago but were ju...
What is your primary use case for Recorded Future?
Our main use case for Recorded Future is brand monitoring, reputation, and risk assessment, as it is one of the best tools that combine all three functionalities. We mainly use Recorded Future for ...
 

Also Known As

Kaspersky Threat Intelligence
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Telefonica, VimpelCom, Monclick, Ezenta
Fujitsu, Regions, SITA, St. Jude Medical, Accenture, T-Mobile, TIAA, Intel Security, Armor, Alert Logic, NTT, Splunk
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Portal vs. Recorded Future and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,099 professionals have used our research since 2012.