Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Recorded Future vs ThreatQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 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

Recorded Future
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Digital Risk Protection (2nd)
ThreatQ
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
16th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) category, the mindshare of Recorded Future is 7.6%, down from 17.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatQ is 1.9%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Recorded Future7.6%
ThreatQ1.9%
Other90.5%
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
 

Featured Reviews

Derek  Lewis - PeerSpot reviewer
Account Manager at Chevron
Continuous threat intelligence has improved brand monitoring and protects against leaked credentials
Some of the areas that need improvement in Recorded Future include email reports that can show unrelated content. Sometimes alerts pop up for articles that have been published years ago but were just recently discovered by Recorded Future. For the browser extension, since the main purpose is to present information regarding IPs, I think it would be best to provide us with an idea of where the IP originates or some additional information about the organization it belongs to. API capabilities in Recorded Future are improving, but there are still some features that are missing and some errors that are hard to handle and understand. The price of Recorded Future is a bit high, especially for smaller teams working on a tight budget, but it is very effective and relatively competitive for large organizations.
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

"The tool is helpful in vulnerability assessment of zero-day vulnerabilities and phishing domains. The solution provides information on any domains of the organization that has undergone phishing or any other cyberattacks."
"The most valuable feature is Recorded Future's protection of exposed customer data on the hardware side."
"The most valuable features of Recorded Future are the useful alerts it provides. If we are monitoring a domain, the solution will provide us with an alert in a prompt manner. It is simple for clients to receive alerts. The advanced search is useful for more accurate filter results."
"Has the ability to conduct and build any query without limitations."
"As a threat intelligence tool, it's very helpful."
"Recorded Future has positively impacted our organization as we are able to cover a lot of sources with only this intelligence provider, not having to have specific tools for clear web or social media monitoring."
"The solution is diverse and provides me with a lot of different mechanisms for evaluation."
"The tool can integrate with a lot of security control and proactive protection devices."
"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

"We can get the data of different malware active throughout the globe, but it would be good if we can do sandboxing of a file. For example, on Any Run, we can perform sandboxing of malware along with their intel about a particular file or hash. It would be great if they have a feature like that."
"There is a semantic oncology dynamic relationship between how the MIGR Tech framework needs more data infusion enrichment capabilities."
"The solution could improve in reducing the false positives. However, most of the other tools on the market have false positives. If they enhance their data algorithm, it could improve the accuracy of results and minimize false positives. Identifying patterns of false possibilities can aid in developing better reporting features that could potentially eliminate them in the future. This recording feature tool could benefit from adopting similar techniques utilized by other tools to enhance its functionality. By doing so, it could minimize the need for manual efforts in distinguishing true positives from false positives, ultimately reducing the workload."
"The tool should improve its third-party supply chain risks because there is a lack of visibility."
"The product gives many false positives. If someone talks about the brand or organization name in the public domain over chats or blocks, it gets highlighted. It may not necessarily be a threat but still gets highlighted which increases the false positive count."
"While I don't think the tool is weak, its position isn't as dominant as it once was. Other companies like CrowdStrike and Mandiant are now challenging them in many areas. One downside is that Recorded Future can be complex for customers to use and understand. This isn't easy for clients to navigate."
"At present, my clients need to be trained by me or another organization on how to use Recorded Future and how to get the best out of it as an analyst, engineer, and administrator. It would be better if clients could directly learn these things without having to go through me or other organizations."
"Recorded Future is a very expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The biggest disadvantage of Recorded Future is the cost here in Eastern Europe. The solution is correctly priced for big companies who have the money to invest in such solutions. Also, the solution is useless on its own, which means that you have to invest in other solutions with which Recorded Future can be integrated. At present, Recorded Future can cost 60,000 euros per year. I am able to offer my clients a 5% to 10% discount, but in this region, the cost is still prohibitive even with the discount. If Recorded Future were more flexible in terms of price, there would be better sales opportunities in Europe and Eastern Europe, in particular, because we have more small- and medium-sized companies here."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing a seven out of ten."
"There appear to be up to five different levels, with the most expensive version costing around $95,000 to $105,000 a year for subscription services."
"The price of the solution is worth it. The overall performance of the solution outweighs the cost."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) solutions are best for your needs.
883,044 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Recorded Future?
I am not the person responsible for purchases, but it's known that Recorded Future is expensive, with a personal rating of eight for cost.
What needs improvement with Recorded Future?
Their research capabilities and the human aspect should be more effective. The Insikt Group covers a narrow range of areas, which doesn't reflect my needs. Their research should be wider and more i...
What is your primary use case for Recorded Future?
Recorded Future ( /products/recorded-future-reviews ) is my main threat intelligence platform that provides alerts regarding brand protection, relevant threat actors, threat groups, and intelligenc...
What do you like most about ThreatQ?
Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy.
What needs improvement with ThreatQ?
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 playb...
What is your primary use case for ThreatQ?
We used the solution for threat mapping and managing IoCs.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Fujitsu, Regions, SITA, St. Jude Medical, Accenture, T-Mobile, TIAA, Intel Security, Armor, Alert Logic, NTT, Splunk
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Recorded Future vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
883,044 professionals have used our research since 2012.