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
6.7
Number of Reviews
12
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
43
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) (48th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (34th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (58th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (19th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (39th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.8%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is 1.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetWitness NDR is 1.7%, 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 (%)
Torq3.8%
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator1.6%
NetWitness NDR1.7%
Other92.9%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

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.
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

"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."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"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."
"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's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"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."
"Their support is really good. I would rate it a nine out of ten. I have never any issues with their support. They always reply and follow our queries on time."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"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 user interface is great."
"Regarding malware, it's great at detecting viruses and malware; we haven't had the problem for the last ten years."
"I really like the DLP feature because it gives IT clarity, it doesn't have database issues, and it hasn't crashed or given us problems in the two years we've been using it."
"The solution is extremely stable; we haven't had any issues whatsoever, and even though there are often false positives, it is easy to fix them in the logs."
"The solution's best part is that it is very easy to manage McAfee Agent."
"It's a scalable solution. We have around five to eight customers using RSA NetWitness Endpoint, and we hope to increase the number of users."
"The solution is stable."
"It helps our security team respond more accurately when there are threats, then we get less false positives or negatives."
"The log correlation is good."
"It is very easy to use, and its usability is great."
"It is stable. We have been using it for some time, without any issues."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features is the Orchestrator."
 

Cons

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"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."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"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."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"One thing that I don't like is that McAfee products change very often and upgrade very often."
"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 could improve the EDR component in many areas, such as the zero-day and persistent threats. The implementation is also complex for this feature."
"Features such as full drive encryption are lacking in the cloud version."
"They have to do something to make the solution more resilient or recoverable from power failure events, which may include creating their own database."
"The fact that it uses MSSQL, and cannot be deployed on anything other than Windows, can be a problem."
"There are some issues we are having with updating our Windows server. So we need to contact support or access our support portal."
"There is a problem when it comes to agent communication and duplicate records, where the rebooting of a machine leads to the installation of a new agent and you get a lot of duplicate records that ultimately affect your compliance monitoring."
"The solution lacks a reporting engine."
"Its price could be improved. It is an expensive product. Its training is also too expensive. It would be great if they can have a better pricing scheme for the training."
"When analyzing something, you have to click several times. It requires a lot of effort to find something."
"This solution needs an upgrade in reporting. I have heard from RSA that they are working on this, but as of yet it is not available."
"NetWitness Endpoint's blocking feature does not work properly - if there's a malicious process, it's not possible to kill it via a custom rule unless and until it's flagged as malicious."
"The threat intelligence could improve in RSA NetWitness Endpoint."
"The problem with this product is that it's a bit slow."
"The solution doesn't have a reporting engine which would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It's 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."
"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."
"Compared to other Antivirus products, the cost of this solution is a bit high."
"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."
"This solution is priced in the mid-range."
"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 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."
"I do not have any opinion on the pricing or licensing of the product."
"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."
"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."
"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 highly scalable. It can be bought based on your requirements."
"It is an expensive product."
"NetWitness Endpoint is less costly than its competitors, but it offers fewer features."
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
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

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 Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
To improve alert handling capability, there are ready-to-use playbooks available, but there are very few. Torq should...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
Torq is primarily used for security operations, mainly for the SOC team. I develop use cases based on requirements fr...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
The maintenance side is very good because we are using the product to reduce activities. For instance, sometimes ther...
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...
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: April 2026.
899,125 professionals have used our research since 2012.