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

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs UnderDefense comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 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

Torq
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (14th)
UnderDefense
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (22nd), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (10th), SOC as a Service (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (10th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (15th), Compliance Management (10th), AI-SOC (8th), AI-Powered Security Automation (4th)
 

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.
Ivan Voitovych - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at Urlicer
AI-driven SOC triage has transformed threat monitoring and keeps our security work focused
The best features UnderDefense offers include mostly triage in-context signals read together across my stack, where one finding replaces many separate checks. A good thing too is its false positive suppression, as I do not get false notifications. Normal activity such as traffic spikes during customer events is recognized and documented, and only the unusual cases reach me. It has full-time support 24/7 with proactive reports, and monitoring runs around the clock. Reports and alerts come to me without even noticing or asking, so it is very useful. My team sees what happened without having to chase it. I find the proactive reporting and 24/7 support to have definitely made a real difference. Proactive reports mean I hear about what happened without having to ask, so I know the state of things at the start of the day, and 24/7 support matters most for traffic spikes and other events outside busy working hours, as I get an answer when I need one without keeping someone on call just in case, saving me a lot of time. Together, they let my team stay on infrastructure work and step in only when a decision is needed. Regarding UnderDefense's AI capabilities, I think the governance and security is the best there is, as the decisions that matter stay with my team and each finding is documented, allowing me to review afterwards how a conclusion was reached. That control and traceability is what I need from AI in a security role. The accuracy and reliability of UnderDefense's AI output is accurate and steady, as findings have matched what I saw when I checked them, and the pattern assessments are consistent, especially during large traffic events or spikes, which is when I depend on them most. When a case needs judgment, the reasoning is there so I can confirm it myself.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"Since we started working with Torq, I am handling much fewer alerts, it is becoming really easy for me to handle an alert, I have all the information that I need, I do not need to connect to different vendors to receive this information, and the main thing I got from Torq is time, which now helps me to build another automated system and learn."
"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."
"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."
"The automation and integration capabilities are strong."
"What I liked the most about Torq is the actual workflow builder, which is really great because they offer a lot of features and convenience features that are useful for any automation engineer."
"Torq has impacted my organization positively by allowing us to earn time and invest resources in other projects that are more meaningful and more interesting, pushing deeper into what a SOC is, and building our processes."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"The user interface is great."
"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."
"The installation process is straightforward."
"From a management point of view, ePO is one of the best solutions out there."
"You have to have some experience, however, it's pretty simple to understand."
"I like the solution's feasibility. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is also better and easier to use than other ePOs."
"Regarding malware, it's great at detecting viruses and malware; we haven't had the problem for the last ten years."
"McAfee is helping us to clean all of the viruses from the machines, protecting our desktops from the latest threats."
"Every morning we look at a short list of cases that matter instead of a long list of raw alerts, and each case comes with the full picture, so we can decide in a few minutes whether it needs action."
"UnderDefense groups it into one alert with the caller, the endpoint, and the usual pattern, which allows us to contact the customer the same day with facts in hand."
"UnderDefense Gen AI SOC flags behavior that breaks from an account's own baseline, lays out which signals triggered the alert and why it reads as different from normal activity, and helps our team decide within the same day whether we are seeing a legitimate big campaign push or a compromised login."
"The linking, the filtering, and the readable reasoning each help on their own, but together, they allow a small security team to handle the volume our platform produces without losing sight of the cases that matter."
"Routine signals are handled and documented, and only cases that need a human decision reach my team, allowing engineers to spend their time on infrastructure hardening instead of log digging."
 

Cons

"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."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"I think the platform could be improved by making advanced workflow troubleshooting easier."
"The case management piece, due to the platform being an automation-first tool, lacks real robust out-of-the-box case templates or good solutions for creating those without spending a lot of time doing development work, which makes the overall experience poor, honestly."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"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."
"Additionally, the documentation for Torq is not very clear. Most of the information is presented in videos, which are not ideal for reading; there are mostly paragraphs and other text-based content."
"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."
"The solution sometimes has some false positives on IP addresses, from the web control aspect of the product. This needs to be improved."
"It would be highly beneficial if the metrics or dashboards could be customized"
"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"
"Lacks a single plug-in for multiple uses."
"The solution is difficult to tune to avoid false positives."
"The rollout to cover the online resources, such as SharePoint, One Drive, and Office 365 doesn't seem to have a very clear path."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator could improve by supporting container microservices, such as Docker and Kubernetes."
"There are some issues relating to the automation of reports. That's why I wanted the DLP reports. There are some problems in this area. Sometimes it does not work even though all the configuration words are right. There are also some problems with automatic updates."
"UnderDefense could improve in onboarding, which takes some dedicated time because the baseline for our high volume upload events needs to be set up first."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"$The price of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is expensive, it is approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per license annually."
"This solution is priced in the mid-range."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It's an expensive solution"
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
39%
Construction Company
13%
Security Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it ...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is for managing IT services and providing faster response.
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would rate Torq a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I chose this rating because customer service is excellent. I suggest to...
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 s...
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.
What is your primary use case for UnderDefense?
Our main use case for UnderDefense Agentic AI SOC is to watch how accounts actually use our platform. Our product is ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UnderDefense?
The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been fair for what we get. Compared with building the same...
What needs improvement with UnderDefense?
UnderDefense could improve in onboarding, which takes some dedicated time because the baseline for our high volume up...
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

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
Kyte, Betsson Grourp, Mammut, Accedian.
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR). Updated: November 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.