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
6.7
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
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
68
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 Sentinel9.8%
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR8.7%
Other79.9%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform8.8%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks10.2%
Cato SASE Cloud Platform7.9%
Other73.1%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at Swimlane
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.
Vibin Thomas - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Team Lead - 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

"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"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."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"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."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"There is no other product out there with the control and overall security components that can do what ePO can."
"From a single dashboard, I can take a look at several things including the endpoint protection, the file integrity section, the data activity monitor, and more."
"It is protecting us from USB-based hazards like viruses."
"We previously used Symantec, and if we compare it to McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is better."
"The most valuable feature of the McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is agent communication."
"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 general endpoint protection is valuable, and it is easy to manage."
"McAfee is helping us to clean all of the viruses from the machines, protecting our desktops from the latest threats."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CASB solutions, which is protecting their Office 365."
"It has been helpful in maintaining our infrastructure. The granular level control it offers allows us to set application policies per application for each user."
"Subsequently, after this, there is a huge reduction, as the vulnerabilities, especially the security bugs that were coming prior to Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, were about 20,000 to 22,000 and have come down more than 40 percent, which is definitely an advantage over the previous product."
"I like the web filtering capabilities."
"The only advantage I see is no more connection is required by the users."
"Before Zscaler, we used to use a lot of other products, however, when we were introduced to Zscaler we became confident it could meet the use cases."
"The most valuable aspect of Zscaler Cloud DLP is its automatic DLP feature."
"The most valuable feature is its seamless integration capabilities, streamlining the process by eliminating the need for extensive installations."
 

Cons

"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"There is no built-in or easy upgrade of the system."
"However there is no definite SLA when a complicate issue is escalated to McAfee Level 3 or to McAfee software developers."
"There are some issues we are having with updating our Windows server. So we need to contact support or access our support portal."
"There should be more insights and completeness into the cyber kill chain, similar to CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. It just seems a little outdated in being 100% signature-based without all of the insights and protections that come with CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. Overall, they've got some catching up to do if they plan to compete in the comprehensive EDR space."
"The solution sometimes has some false positives on IP addresses, from the web control aspect of the product. This needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the impact of the agent on the endpoint's performance - the resources it takes."
"What could be improved in Zscaler Private Access is its notification. For example, if there's a speed issue, there should be a pop-up that alerts the user about it. If there is a network quality issue, for example, it isn't good enough to connect to, or the network quality is bad, there should be a notification from the solution. Zscaler Private Access also needs improvement in terms of its interface and security."
"There are latency issues with the solution. They are small, however, they are there when you compare it to other vendors."
"Zscaler Private Access's reporting is poor. We should have more insight into the reports regarding what is blocked and allowed."
"Users report application access or latency issues with Zscaler Private Access."
"Conflicts arise if you do not have the same management teams on the product."
"There is some issue while accessing the portal. It takes too long."
"The DX layer could be better if it had improved visibility."
"It has a limitation, if you are creating a rule or something for a web application or something, you could only add five users, not more than that. Five or four users are only included in a rule. If you want to create a rule for more than five or four users, you have to go through other methods, not particularly with the application. Working within the application with this method would be quite easy as compared to listing a URL or a normal IP address."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"This solution is priced in the mid-range."
"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."
"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."
"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"
"$The price of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is expensive, it is approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per license annually."
"It has been relatively reasonable for what it does. Some of the additional license costs based on the advanced next-generation firewall functions are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Overall, the cost seems reasonable."
"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."
"The pricing is expensive and on the higher end. Honestly, in my opinion, it is not worth the price."
"In the long run, cloud services are not inherently costly."
"Zscaler CASB is an expensive solution."
"The licensing model for Zscaler Cloud DLP allows you to only buy what you need. You don't need to buy it as a whole, so it's good."
"As per industry leads, Zscaler CASB is an expensive solution."
"The solution is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
899,125 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
I do not dislike anything about Torq because it has satisfied all of our use cases and requirements. We contacted sup...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
Initially, we were using Slack for small automations, such as creating pipelines or shutting down servers. For exampl...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I have been working for five years with experience in the IT field. Torq is very good. It manages everything. I would...
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 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 Splunk, Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR). Updated: May 2026.
899,125 professionals have used our research since 2012.