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

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs NetWitness NDR comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Torq
Sponsored
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
NetWitness NDR
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (49th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (34th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (59th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (20th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (41st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.6%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is 1.7%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetWitness NDR is 1.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Torq3.6%
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator1.7%
NetWitness NDR1.8%
Other92.9%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at ProArch
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.
Binu Haneef - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at Sky News Arabia
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.
reviewer1799727 - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager, IT Security Operations at a non-profit with 11-50 employees
Reliable and good support but can be expensive
I have no real complaints about the solution. Threat detection could be better. They need to enhance their threat intelligence feeds. We would like to have more IOCs or more trade intelligence to not only rely on the intelligence of the engineer in charge but to have some threat intelligence and some seeds of IOCs and to have the host have some artificial intelligence to reduce the number of false positives. I don't see this solution being very scalable. The solution is pricey.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"Torq has exceeded expectations by delivering workflows in a timely and lower effort manner than XSOAR, and it meets all my needs while saving a ton of time and targeting $600,000 saved this year, which is a substantial amount of money."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"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."
"Torq has definitely changed the day-to-day experience for our security analysts, as they feel more excited and feel that Torq interface and workflow allow them to build things themselves."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"The most valuable features of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator are the easy-to-use console, and lots of reports, such as customized reports and inventory reports. Additionally, overall the centralized management is very good where you can see the compliance levels and inventory."
"I like McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator software; it is great centralized security management software that allows management of various McAfee products on the client computers and makes risk and compliance management in the organization simpler and more reliable."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator has a built-in advanced pattern, which is very useful because it can detect any pattern."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator improves our general endpoint security - wherever a user might be tricked into clicking on a link or downloading a file or bringing a file on an external medium or getting it from somewhere on the internet, after having detected that it could be malicious, it blocks it."
"The central management console is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"From a management point of view, ePO is one of the best solutions out there."
"The security is a key feature and the console is very user friendly."
"The general endpoint protection is valuable, and it is easy to manage."
"The interface of this solution is very flexible and easy to use."
"The solution is scalable; it creates 3,000 lab logs per second, and I think the solution is suitable for large companies or medium to large companies."
"We like the solution doesn't have to be managed by an IT department; it's easy to use and you can still check the machine without the IT department being involved."
"The detection rate and tracking features including historical tracking, tracking of the fires on the desk, and tracking of the file last monitored are all quite valuable for us."
"NetWitness Endpoint's most valuable features are its interoperability across many different operating systems and the ease of pivoting from network to endpoint via a single console."
"In my opinion, this is the best platform, world-wide, and I am happy with it."
"It is stable. We have been using it for some time, without any issues."
"This solution allows us to locate the malware in real-time."
 

Cons

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"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."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"However, we did encounter some problems with custom steps, which definitely affected our progress, and the speed of bug fixes is also a bit slower than expected."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"Torq can be improved by adding some more features, such as adding more automation and providing a no-code option so I don't have to code for everything."
"I wish Torq's AI assistant for building templated workflows from scratch worked better; when you start with a blank slate, asking AI to help you build or template the workflow out does not go well."
"We need to consolidate multiple features into one console. It would be beneficial to have all the important features on a single platform."
"Features such as full drive encryption are lacking in the cloud version."
"Sometimes agents hang. We have to reinstall the agents."
"The technical support from McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator was very good with technically efficient professionals previously. However, recently I have noticed that support staff are primarily L1, and even when escalating to L2 or L3, we do not see the same level of expertise in people resolving issues."
"The installation process is quite difficult and requires technical support."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade the technology; it's like their area function is not quite as good as compared to other market vendors."
"Lacks a single plug-in for multiple uses."
"The rollout to cover the online resources, such as SharePoint, One Drive, and Office 365 doesn't seem to have a very clear path."
"The solution doesn't have a reporting engine which would be helpful."
"The problem with this product is that it's a bit slow."
"The contamination feature could be improved."
"The deployment process is complex. I don't know why, but this solution will suddenly stop working. Logs stop coming. Often, one thing or another stops working. Most of the time, one of my team members is working with troubleshooting and working with technical support. Log passing is also one of the biggest challenge."
"We would like to see the hunting and investigation features of this solution improved, in order to provide better visibility of issues."
"The integration of the solution needs to be improved. The dashboard needs lots of updates as well. In the next release, we would like to see advanced fraud detection features."
"Threat detection could be better."
"I don't see this solution being very scalable."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Compared to other Antivirus products, the cost of this solution is a bit high."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is a cheaply priced product, meaning it is not expensive since McAfee provides a free version of ePO, which includes phone support as well."
"This solution is priced in the mid-range."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is not an expensive solution."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a three out of ten."
"It's an expensive solution"
"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."
"$The price of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is expensive, it is approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per license annually."
"The pricing is not very economical. It is a quite costly product for India. One thing is that when you purchase it, you have to purchase a module separately."
"We are on a three-year contract to use RSA NetWitness Network."
"The price of the solution depends on the environment. If the environment is large then it will cost more. However, the larger the environment with more endpoints, you will receive an increased discount. If the environment is very small, then you might think it is expensive. It is always better to buy in bulk to receive a discount. The minimum number of assets is usually 500, with discounts on 1000 and 2000."
"I do not have any opinion on the pricing or licensing of the product."
"NetWitness Endpoint is less costly than its competitors, but it offers fewer features."
"They can easily adjust if you have the requirements which are required. If you have a budget cut or a budget constraint, they can bend."
"It is an expensive product."
"With RSA, there is flexibility in choosing the service, products, and the range that meets your requirement, as well as they are flexible in terms of pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
Torq can be improved by adding some more features, such as adding more automation and providing a no-code option so I...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is reviewing the incidents and responding to them. After that, I investigate them and take ...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would definitely recommend others to use Torq as it is an all-rounder tool which even integrates AI. As we all know...
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 secur...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION ePO?
There is a question regarding suggestions for additional tools or functions for McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, and whet...
What is your primary use case for McAfee MVISION ePO?
The question pertains to describing the use case and process for which people utilize McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO
RSA ECAT, NetWitness Network
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
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
ADP, Ameritas, Partners Healthcare
Find out what your peers are saying about McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. NetWitness NDR and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.