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

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), AI-SOC (2nd), AI-Powered Security Automation (2nd)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (16th)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (5th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), Application Control (4th), ZTNA as a Service (1st), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (2nd), Remote Browser Isolation (RBI) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator1.6%
Microsoft Sentinel10.1%
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR8.8%
Other79.5%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform8.9%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks10.4%
Cato SASE Cloud Platform8.7%
Other72.0%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

Nimrod Vardi - PeerSpot reviewer
Global IT Director at OpenWeb
Automation workflows have transformed our IT, enabling secure just-in-time access control
We work with them quite often, so we have a direct line regarding areas in Torq that have room for improvement. If we have a feature request, we can request it. I do not have anything in mind at the moment. We were a design partner for a short while, so we feel that they listen and that users of the system have an impact on the way the system is designed for the better. They have a new community, which is something that I personally suggested years ago. There are many people like me in different places and they might have already built the workflow that I need. Having the option to share workflows or to jump on a thread and say I have this need, did anyone ever build a workflow for it, is amazing. Someone would jump in and say yes, sure, here, take this workflow. I think this is an amazing thing and I really hope that the community will come alive because I think this is really powerful. This is something that I already suggested and it did happen eventually, and I am quite happy with it. I do not have any specific feature in mind that I have a need for at the moment.
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.
Vibin Thomas - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
Zero trust access has transformed remote connectivity and now simplifies secure app usage
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, especially Zscaler Private Access, is very strong, though there are a few areas where improvements can be made. One challenge observed is around initial troubleshooting and visibility. While Zscaler Private Access provides logs, it can sometimes take time to pinpoint the exact cause of access issues, especially in complex environments with multiple policies and identity integration. Another area is the dependency on identity and connector health. Since Zscaler Private Access is heavily reliant on app connectors and identity providers, any issues with these components can impact user access, making proper monitoring critical. During the initial setup, policy configuration and application onboarding require careful planning, especially for larger environments with many applications. These challenges are manageable with proper design and monitoring. Overall, the platform delivers strong security and user experience. I would recommend a few improvements, especially around user interface, reporting, and troubleshooting experience. From a user interface perspective, while the platform is powerful, the policy configuration and navigation can feel complex, especially for new users. A more simplified and intuitive layout for policy mapping and application access would help reduce the learning curve. In terms of reporting, Zscaler Private Access provides logs, but having more built-in customizable dashboards and analytics would be very helpful. Better visibility into user access patterns, application performance, and real-time troubleshooting insights would improve operational efficiency. From a support and troubleshooting standpoint, it would be beneficial to have more granular centralized visibility, allowing for quick end-to-end tracing of a user request from authentication to application access without switching between multiple views. These improvements would make the platform even more efficient, especially for large-scale enterprise environments.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"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."
"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."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"The best part is management in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator."
"The installation process is straightforward."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator's performance is good."
"The solution's best part is that it is very easy to manage McAfee Agent."
"If you set it up right, it can really manage a very complex environment which requires fine tuning where there are a lot of exceptions."
"The advantages of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator include being a centralized management console, which we possess when managing multiple solutions in Trellix DLP and EPP through the EPO solution."
"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."
"The valuable feature of the McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is the management of the policies."
"The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are its ability to integrate with multiple IDPs and application segmentation."
"Zscaler CASB's latency and architecture are excellent."
"The scalability of the solution is great."
"I like the web filtering capabilities."
"The most valuable features of Zscaler CASB are API integration and DLP."
"The policies are very easy to implement."
"The UI is easy to use."
"The product's most valuable features are cloud-based services and secure internet access. We don't have to set up any physical appliances."
 

Cons

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"It was able to capture data but was unable to differentiate between the agent hostname we are using and the hostname that resides on the back end of the Internet."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"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."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator could improve by supporting container microservices, such as Docker and Kubernetes."
"There is no built-in or easy upgrade of the system."
"It would be highly beneficial if the metrics or dashboards could be customized"
"We would like to see more integration with different platforms and extend this to other platforms. We are migrating to the cloud and want to extend it from our on-premises setup to the cloud."
"Although it has the ability to auto create service tickets, it needs to expand to allow more products this ability."
"The issues with the integration capabilities of the product, specifically the ones that are deployed on an on-premises model, need to be improved."
"The solution sometimes has some false positives on connections from the web control aspect of the product."
"As for improvements, I think that putting everything on a cloud and one console would be a great idea and would be useful for customers."
"The pricing is expensive and on the higher end. Honestly, in my opinion, it is not worth the price."
"There is some issue while accessing the portal. It takes too long."
"The only issue with Zscaler Cloud DLP is that it only gives you DLP protection from web traffic, which is flowing out, while a full-blown DLP solution such as Forcepoint or Symantec gives you DLP coverage for multiple channels. Zscaler Cloud DLP doesn't give you coverage for email, fax, and USB channels, and this is the only challenge or room for improvement in the solution. It's just an extension on top of what you're buying on the proxy, so it's just an added layer, and it doesn't cover DLP on a very broad level. I'm unsure if Zcaler is in the business of competing with a full-blown DLP solution, and if there's a plan to expand the features of Zscaler Cloud DLP beyond the web channel because you'll have to deploy a full-blown agent for it. I'm unsure if this is on the cards because the solution is just an added layer that you get with your proxy. I've asked the Zcaler team whether there's a plan to go full DLP in the future, but I didn't get a positive response. There isn't any feature I'd like added to Zscaler Cloud DLP currently, because anything you could think of that should be in cloud or SaaS solutions is already there, except for machine learning, as it's the only functionality that seems to be lacking in the solution. Machine learning is an additional policy available in other DLP solutions in the market, but my team didn't find it in Zscaler Cloud DLP."
"There is improvement in enhancing proper manageability, policies, and logs. So, log management could be improved."
"Price-wise, it is a costly product and it should be reduced."
"Conflicts arise if you do not have the same management teams on the product."
"Price-wise, it is a costly product and it should be reduced."
"They should work on a replica account. There could be alerts and replica files sent to the DLP team during data collection."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"It's 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."
"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."
"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 not an expensive solution."
"It's expensive currently. But when purchasing for a large number of users, there's room to negotiate. It's really up to the procurement team."
"Zscaler Cloud DLP is moderately priced. We pay around 2 million rupees per year."
"The price is competitive."
"In terms of market positioning, I would describe Zscaler Private Access as offering optimal pricing. Based on our experience, Cato Networks tends to be slightly more expensive."
"My company is a Zscaler Private Access partner, so the customers pay for the license fees."
"Zscaler Private Access can be an expensive solution, depending on the license type you will purchase."
"The solution has increased prices this year."
"It is an auto-renewal subscription service."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
7%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise45
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
This is exactly what we discussed two days ago with the Torq team. We told them where we want to see improvements. Fo...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
I use Torq as my case management and alert system. Working as a SOC analyst, the first thing I do every morning is ge...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would definitely recommend Torq. I have no doubt, really. When we looked for another vendor, Torq really answered a...
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 do you like most about McAfee MVISION ePO?
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator's performance is good.
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure ac...
What needs improvement with Zscaler SASE?
The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.
What is your primary use case for Zscaler SASE?
We are using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange for its Zscaler Internet Access service. It provides web security, DLP, data...
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO
Zscaler SASE, Zscaler DLP, Zscaler CASB, Zscaler CSPM, Zscaler Browser Isolation, Zscaler Posture Control
 

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
Siemens, AutoNation, GE, NOV
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Splunk, Palo Alto Networks and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR). Updated: April 2026.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.