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

Logpoint vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator comparison

 

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

Logpoint
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (34th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (31st), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (12th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (45th)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Logpoint is 1.2%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is 0.7%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator0.7%
Logpoint1.2%
Other98.1%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

Abdullah Secca - PeerSpot reviewer
Valuable monitoring and integration features boost compliance
They are not in the US market, and the quality of support has declined. They migrated operations from Boston to Denmark, and we cannot use a tool hosted outside the country. Additionally, dealing with foreign entities for support was a challenge, leading us to switch providers due to lack of adequate support.
Binu Haneef - PeerSpot reviewer
Comprehensive security management enabled through efficient integration and automation
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator helps automate routine security tasks. We created customized automation. For example, when we did not have an EDR or XDR solution, we created tasks exclusively for detection and response automation and automatic segregation of infected PCs. The ability to customize the dashboard in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator helps us significantly. The main feature is automation for auto-segmentation and segregation. As we are in an AI era, McAfee can focus on AI tools. Instead of putting manual effort into each security-related task, it can implement more advanced automation using AI. This enhancement could improve cybersecurity significantly. Regarding the reporting area in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, we are satisfied with what we currently have. Our cybersecurity team needs customized reports beyond the default ones. We have more than 20 separate reports for identifying threats, managing, and understanding the security posture of our company and assets.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The UEBA component, as well as the SOAR component, are some of the most valuable features of Logpoint."
"It is an AI technology because it is using machine learning technology. So far, there is nothing better out there for UEBA in terms of monitoring endpoints and user activity. It is using machine learning language, so it is right at the top. It provides that capability and monitors all the activities. It devises a baseline and monitors if there is any deviation from the baseline."
"The integration is very user-friendly. There are not many CLI commands. Everything is directly accessible from the web interface."
"The solution's user interface is quite simple, and the integration is better than other products."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most beneficial was being able to prove, with proper reports, that from a compliance perspective, the company is in control. The service part of LogPoint did modifications or did some additional work to have the proper reports defined."
"The flexibility of the search feature and the solution's analytics features are the most valuable parts of the solution."
"We like the user and entity behaviour analytics (UEBA) and find it valuable."
"The solution's best part is that it is very easy to manage McAfee Agent."
"Technical support is very helpful."
"We implemented data transfer protection, which allows transfer in one direction only. Users can copy from the PC to the USB but not from the USB to the PC. That way, if someone is carrying a virus on a USB, it will not be transferred to the PC."
"The policy auditing, policy management, and device auditing are all valuable features. Our customers appreciated the ability to get alerts to system-wide events from a single view."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is its general purpose of protecting our endpoints from infections, malicious files, and all those kinds of things. The fact that there are organized policies and policy inheritance. The general management."
"The automation alert for the ticketing tool is one of the vital features"
"The initial setup is very easy."
"I like the solution's feasibility. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is also better and easier to use than other ePOs."
 

Cons

"Dashboards could be developed further."
"It is complicated to collect daily logs from other systems."
"LogPoint can improve its dashboards. We are not able to customize the dashboard when creating them. They only have preset dashboards which do not have exactly what we are looking for."
"What could be improved in LogPoint is its UI because it's less friendly to users than LogRhythm. The UI could be more aesthetically appealing to users. It's completely outdated."
"The documentation part is something that needs to be improved, as well as the threat intelligence investigation part."
"The interface needs things like wizards that will assist with creating complex correlation rules."
"Logpoint is not flexible. Its documentation is not user-friendly."
"It is a good product, but its interface or GUI could be better."
"It's a little bit complex to configure it, but when you start using it, it is much easier. There are many policies that you need to create, and in three or four places"
"The impact of the agent on the endpoint's performance - the resources it takes. Additionally, the difficulties we experience with inheriting and breaking inheritance on the organization's structure breakdown for policy inheritance and then for rules inheritance. We are actually struggling with this."
"The installation process is quite difficult and requires technical support."
"I would like to see McAfee reduce the amount of manual work required."
"While there are bugs and a few functionality issues, it is just a matter of raising them with the support team. However, support is part of the problem as well. You want everything to be seamless in a perfect world, but the support is spread across different countries. They have Level 1, 2, and 3. Level 1 is most likely in a developing country. They don't provide the best service."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator support has been helpful. However, sometimes when I raise the case they take a while to answer. For example, the last time I used them it took them two weeks to reply back by email. No one has contacted me back since. They should improve their service."
"Lacks a single plug-in for multiple uses."
"One thing that I don't like is that McAfee products change very often and upgrade very often."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's getting more expensive, which is one of the reasons we're looking around just to see if there's anything better value."
"It's less expensive than the competitors. The Logpoint marketing team is very accommodating and client-friendly. They offer very good reductions in price. They are pretty good in this aspect. They are transparent in their licensing and pricing."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I would rate LogPoint's pricing a seven. It is not very expensive compared to some of the more costly products, and it is not very cheap compared to some of the cheaper products in the SIEM market."
"It was on a yearly basis at about $100K. It was not a huge environment. We were running it on our own virtual server environment, which, of course, had a cost. There was hardware and some energy cost, and then there were Microsoft Windows licenses for servers. That's all, but there was nothing in comparison to the licensing costs."
"Logpoint's pricing is mid-ranged and depends on the number of devices."
"For a hundred user deployment the cost is about $10,000. The next year it would be the same because it's a subscription-based license. There are separate costs as well, for example, if a customer asks for training for their staff."
"It has a fixed price, which is what I like about LogPoint. I bought the system and paid for it, and I pay maintenance. It is not a consumption model. Most SIEMs or most of the log management systems are consumption-based, which means that you pay for how many logs you have in the system. That's a real problem because logs can grow very quickly in different circumstances, and when you have a variable price model, you never know what you're going to pay. Splunk is notoriously expensive for that reason. If you use Splunk or QRadar, it becomes expensive because there are not just the logs; you also have to parse the logs and create indexes. Those indexes can be very expensive in terms of space. Therefore, if they charge you by this space, you can end up paying a significant amount of money. It can be more than what you expect to pay. I like the fact that LogPoint has a fixed cost. I know what I'm going to pay on a yearly basis. I pay that, and I pay the maintenance, and I just make it work."
"My company used to pay for LogPoint costs annually. It's a cost-effective solution. I'm not part of the Finance team, though, so I'm not sure exactly what the licensing fee is or what license my company had."
"For large enterprise companies, the price should be alright, but for small businesses, the uptake might be slow because, for these clients, the price doesn't look very attractive."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is not an expensive solution."
"Compared to other Antivirus products, the cost of this solution is a bit high."
"There is a license required to use this solution. If we use the additional components, such as DLP encryption, there is an additional cost. However, it is similar to a separate product altogether. If you want to use that or not, it is optional, but when you use it, it will cost you additional pricing."
"It is attractively priced. It is a fraction of what we're going to pay for CrowdStrike or SentinelOne, but it only has a fraction of the capabilities as well."
"It's an expensive solution"
"McAfee tries to package different things into different products, then sell them as different products with different licenses. They just split everything up into multiple things. That's just their sales pitch and how they do it."
"$The price of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is expensive, it is approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per license annually."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
26%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
University
7%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogPoint?
I rate the pricing at eight, suggesting it's relatively good or affordable.
What needs improvement with LogPoint?
Logpoint needs to be cloud-native, as currently, it is not. Additionally, there should be compliance mapping, where the features and actions within Logpoint map to security compliance standards.
Which is better - Mcafee's MVision ePO or ePolicy Orchestrator?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Mcafee's MVision ePO or ePolicy Orchestrator network security software was the better fit for us. We decided to go with Mcafee's ePolicy O...
What do you like most about McAfee MVISION ePO?
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator's performance is good.
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AP Pension, Copenhagen Airports, KMD, Terma, DISA, Danish Crown, Durham City Council, Game, TopDanmark, Lahti Energia, Energi Midt, Synoptik, Eissmann Group Automotive, Aligro, CG50...
Brelje & Race, Cognizant, Sutherland Global Services, Eagle Rock Energy, Arab National Bank, Bank Central Asia, Kleberg Bank, Leading Mexican Bank, SF Police Credit Union, Macquarie Telecom, Seagate Technology, Blackburn & Darwen Council, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, IRCEP, Major U.S. State Government, State of Alaska, State of Colorado, Cemex, Deutsche Edelstahlwerke
Find out what your peers are saying about Logpoint vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.