McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs ThreatQ comparison

McAfee and ThreatQuotient are both solutions in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category. McAfee is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.7, while ThreatQuotient is ranked #22 with an average rating of 7.0. McAfee holds a 0.7% mindshare in SOAR, compared to ThreatQuotient’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 82% of McAfee users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of ThreatQuotient users who would recommend it.

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Read 43 McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator reviews

1,038 Views
602 Comparison Views

82% willing to recommend

ThreatQ

Read 2 ThreatQ reviews

871 Views
375 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

ThreatQ

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 2024

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and ThreatQ are competing products in the cybersecurity management space. ThreatQ is considered superior due to its robust features despite McAfee's advantages in pricing and support.

Features: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator offers comprehensive security management, integrating multiple security solutions into a single platform. It provides centralized management and real-time visibility to enhance threat response. ThreatQ focuses on intelligence-driven security operations with advanced threat intelligence analysis, customized workflows, and collaborative data management, providing a sophisticated approach to handling threat data.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator offers straightforward deployment with extensive support resources for seamless integration into existing systems. Its efficient customer service enhances deployment efficiency. ThreatQ's deployment is slightly more complex but is supported by highly responsive customer service, aiding users through intricate setups and contributing to successful deployment.

Pricing and ROI: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is recognized for cost-effectiveness with competitive pricing that enhances ROI, offering value for its pricing tier based on its support and features. ThreatQ tends to be more expensive, but its superior features justify the investment for organizations prioritizing advanced threat intelligence, despite the higher initial cost.

To learn more, read our detailed McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. ThreatQ Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. ThreatQ

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,566 peers since 2012

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

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

ThreatQ

Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)

22nd

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is 0.7%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatQ is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator	0.7%
ThreatQ	1.2%
Other	98.1%

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)

Featured Reviews

Binu Haneef

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.

Read full review

Yasir Akram

Software Engineer at Freelancer

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"McAfee is helping us to clean all of the viruses from the machines, protecting our desktops from the latest threats."

"If you set it up right, it can really manage a very complex environment which require fine tuning where there are a lot of exceptions. That's what it caters to. It can just do those specifics in those exceptional situations, which is good."

"The general endpoint protection is valuable, and it is easy to manage."

"The initial setup is very easy."

"The most valuable features of this solution are the antivirus and the DLP."

"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 central manager policy means we have almost all client modules in one solution."

"I like the solution's feasibility. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is also better and easier to use than other ePOs."

More McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator pros

"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

"I would like to see McAfee reduce the amount of manual work required."

"The areas of concern where improvements are needed are related to the product's assignment policy and tag assignment, where users can assign the policies with the help of tags and sort out the systems."

"There needs to be support for Mac computers. Currently, McAfee does not work on iOS."

"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator could improve by supporting container microservices, such as Docker and Kubernetes."

"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade its technology since the solution's EDR function is not good compared to other vendors in the market."

"The solution sometimes has some false positives on IP addresses, from the web control aspect of the product. This needs to be improved."

"The installation process is quite difficult and requires technical support."

"Lacks a single plug-in for multiple uses."

More McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator cons

"The tool is not user-friendly."

"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

More McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator pricing and cost advice

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

University

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	19

No data available

Questions from the Community

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about McAfee MVISION ePO?

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator's performance is good.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee MVISION ePO?

It's an expensive solution.

See all answers

What do you like most about ThreatQ?

Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ThreatQ?

We used the solution for threat mapping and managing IoCs.

See all answers

Comparisons

Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 19% of the time

GTB Technologies Inspector vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 18% of the time

Splunk SOAR vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 18% of the time

Symantec Data Loss Prevention vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 16% of the time

IBM Security QRadar vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 14% of the time

More McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Competitors

ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) vs ThreatQ

Compared 44% of the time

Anomali vs ThreatQ

Compared 28% of the time

Recorded Future vs ThreatQ

Compared 14% of the time

Cyware Cyber Fusion vs ThreatQ

Compared 7% of the time

EclecticIQ vs ThreatQ

Compared 6% of the time

More ThreatQ Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

September 2025

Download McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator product report

Buyer's Guide

Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)

October 2025

Download ThreatQ product report

Also Known As

McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO

No data available

Overview

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator (McAfee ePO) is the most advanced, extensible, and scalable centralized security management software in the industry. Unifying security management through an open platform, McAfee ePO makes risk and compliance management simpler and more successful for organizations of all sizes.

McAfee

ThreatQ is a cybersecurity platform designed to enhance threat intelligence operations. It centralizes and manages threat data, allowing organizations to identify and respond to threats more efficiently.

ThreatQ is designed to empower security teams by personalizing threat intelligence and automation processes. It integrates with existing technologies, streamlining data collection and distribution. This promotes efficient detection, investigation, and response to security incidents, improving overall cybersecurity posture and resilience.

What are the key features of ThreatQ?

Data Aggregation: Centralizes threat data from multiple sources for easy access.
Customization: Tailors threat intelligence to suit specific security needs.
Automation: Streamlines repetitive security tasks to save time.
Integration: Seamlessly connects with existing security tools.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Improved Efficiency: Reduces time needed for threat investigation.
Enhanced Decision-Making: Provides actionable insights for security actions.
Cost Savings: Maximizes existing security resources and investments.
Scalability: Adapts as organizations grow and threats evolve.

ThreatQ is versatile in industries like finance and healthcare, where cybersecurity is crucial. It facilitates swift threat identification and risk management, essential for protecting sensitive data and complying with industry regulations. Its adaptability allows it to fit into diverse security architectures, making it a valuable asset across sectors.

ThreatQuotient

Sample Customers

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

Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security

Buyer's Guide

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. ThreatQ

September 2025

Free Report: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. ThreatQ

Find out what your peers are saying about McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. ThreatQ report.

See our list of best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) vendors.

We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.