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

Rapid7 InsightConnect vs ThreatQ comparison

Why PeerSpot?
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
6.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Rapid7 InsightConnect
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
17th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatQ
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
26th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.6%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 InsightConnect is 1.8%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatQ is 1.4%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Torq3.6%
Rapid7 InsightConnect1.8%
ThreatQ1.4%
Other93.2%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

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.
VF
Security Systems Engineer at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
Automation workflows have simplified integrations and now need richer custom connector options
Support for Jira could be improved because currently, Jira is only supported in the cloud version. It would be a great idea to support Jira Data Center versions too since Atlassian announced that Jira Server has become end-of-life over a year ago. The connection with Data Center Jira is not super stable, so the Jira Data Center connector should definitely be improved. In future updates of Rapid7 InsightConnect, it would be really great to have some advanced capabilities for connectors. For example, if the tool is using an API, we could write code to give more flexibility for engineers to set up different integrations, even for solutions that are not available in the existing integrations. That would definitely be a significant advantage.
reviewer2384535 - PeerSpot reviewer
Threat Intelligence Lead at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Improves the threat intelligence gathering process, but it is not user-friendly
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 playbook is a little difficult for a beginner. The vendor must simplify the tool and make it user-friendly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"Torq offers the best feature through integration with AI."
"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."
"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."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Rapid7 InsightConnect has great features, particularly easy and straightforward deployment."
"Based on my user experience, I would recommend InsightConnect for its user-friendly interface and excellent documentation."
"Rapid7 is the better product because of its features, capabilities, integration, and support."
"InsightIDR's Attacker Behavioral Analytics (ABA) and User and Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) features have been very useful in maintaining our security posture."
"The tool is stable. The initial setup is straightforward. The product is user-friendly."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
"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."
 

Cons

"However, we did encounter some problems with custom steps, which definitely affected our progress, and the speed of bug fixes is also a bit slower than expected."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"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."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"The technical support should be improved."
"The GUI needs improvement, as creating workflows can be cumbersome. More updated plugins are needed to leverage existing functionalities, such as APIs for functions like blocking malicious IPs in FortiGate."
"The solution really needs better integration."
"The GUI needs improvement, as creating workflows can be cumbersome."
"Support for Jira could be improved because currently, Jira is only supported in the cloud version."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
911,436 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Performing Arts
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise11
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
Torq can be improved by adding some more features, such as adding more automation and providing a no-code option so I...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is reviewing the incidents and responding to them. After that, I investigate them and take ...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would definitely recommend others to use Torq as it is an all-rounder tool which even integrates AI. As we all know...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 InsightConnect?
Compared to other SOAR solutions, the pricing is reasonable as Rapid7 provides it as a bundle called InsightIDR Ultim...
What needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightConnect?
Support for Jira could be improved because currently, Jira is only supported in the cloud version. It would be a grea...
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 InsightConnect?
Rapid7 InsightConnect is usually used for integrations. There are tons of different integrations we use, such as anti...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Rapid7 Insight Connect, Komand
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Starr Companies, Landmark Health
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Rapid7 InsightConnect vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
911,436 professionals have used our research since 2012.