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

ThreatBook vs VirusTotal comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 31, 2025

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

ThreatBook
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
16th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Network Detection and Response (NDR) (14th)
VirusTotal
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

RG
Enhancement in incident response through reduced false positives and contextual intelligence
ThreatBook has positively impacted our organization by allowing us to detect all alerts and threats effectively. In the past, we needed to search logs from various sources, including terminals, DI servers, and firewalls, collecting a lot of logs and searching the internet for contextual information about threat actors. After using ThreatBook TDP, all alerts and contexts are easily displayed on the dashboard, making it very helpful for us. During the incident response scenario, ThreatBook saves us over 80% of the time for each incident. We usually took about one day or two days for attribution and understanding how the attacker attacked us, but after using ThreatBook TDP, we usually take around one or two hours to finish all these tasks. Additionally, their AI techniques save a lot of time, allowing me to ask in natural language for explanations about the meaning and target of the attacker.
Chinmay Banerjee - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps businesses collect threat data while keeping privacy in mind and apable of detecting, blocking, and removing viruses and malware
There are two gray areas I still need to explore. I have worked with VirusTotal because it easily integrates with over seventy antivirus scanners and blacklisting services. In addition to those there is much scope to improve and add other services or integrations. The areas for improvement are that VirusTotal is not using much AI or generative AI models, while other competitors are starting to build them. For example, VirusTotal's work is based on the setup done by their engineers. If you want to do scanning or protection activities for a specific site, app, or device, that is the area VirusTotal is currently focused on. But other competitors are building AI models that can do things like left-side scanning and provide auto-generated reports. VirusTotal has predefined reports, but there is a lot of manual effort involved. Secondly, the API is very limited if I want to integrate VirusTotal with other applications. They need to build more connectors and provide support for Webhook connectors for the API. If you can't build your own connector, it's always good to have provisions for Webhook setup connectors across platforms. Thirdly, Kaspersky, a competitor of VirusTotal, is using a methodology called "gatekeeper." A gatekeeper is a security system that protects the inside of a building from outside threats. This is the model Kaspersky is currently using. You have your website set up, but the entire army of VirusTotal or Kaspersky is standing guard, protecting you from the first gate itself. Right now, VirusTotal detects threats from your domain, but it is always better to verify inside the domain and protect it from the first level when people or malware are entering. This first level of protection is lacking in VirusTotal right now. The security bridge and protection gate are missing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ThreatBook saves us over 80% of the time for each incident."
"ThreatBook saves us over 80% of time for each incident, reducing the usual time taken from one or two days for attribution to just one or two hours, thanks to their AI techniques."
"It can scan the dark web and find if an email ID has been compromised. This is another area that we have not explored yet."
"The most valuable feature is the worldwide malware information database."
"The feature I like the most is the ability to see the MD5 or SHA-256 signature of the file, and also the composition of the file according to its segments."
"It provides detailed insights into possible malicious behavior, dropped files, and TCP connections."
"It is quite simple for anyone if they just want to check some suspicious URLs."
"The product is easy to use with coding, such as Python or Java, via its API."
"It allows us to see if there have been previous reports on certain indicators of compromise, providing insights from other security professionals."
"VirusTotal provides 95% to 98% accurate information."
 

Cons

"We’ve seen strong ROI through reduced incident response times, increased threat visibility, and less time wasted on false positives."
"It would be great if ThreatBook could integrate with our ITSM system to streamline the tasks and incident management"
"They can improve the telemetry. Whenever we handle a sample, they cannot provide any information about a victim."
"VirusTotal has predefined reports, but there is a lot of manual effort involved."
"There is room for improvement, particularly in making some of the most useful features more accessible in the non-paid version."
"I would like to see improvements in the score consistency and accuracy."
"VirusTotal has different versions, and sometimes the parameters of the API are not very clear."
"I would like to see improvements in the score consistency and accuracy."
"VirusTotal is hard to understand because you need to know Google Docs to create queries, and it doesn't have documentation for that."
"The platform could improve in the areas of endpoints and networks."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"VirusTotal is an expensive solution."
"We are using VirusTotal with free licenses, managing the license limits across three or four accounts, thus incurring no costs."
"The pricing is very economical."
"The pricing is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatBook?
The procurement process is easy because ThreatBook is a subscription model, and when I need it, I just pay for it. The billing experience is clear with no extra fees; all the costs are clearly show...
What needs improvement with ThreatBook?
It would be great if ThreatBook could integrate with our ITSM system to streamline the tasks and incident management, and I hope this feature will be provided in the future. Everything is perfect, ...
What is your primary use case for ThreatBook?
Mainly, we use ThreatBook TDP to monitor the east-west and north-south network traffic, detect abnormal behaviors, and provide contextual intelligence to support our threat hunting and incident res...
What do you like most about VirusTotal?
With VirusTotal, I can check for any hash, malware, file, domain, IP URL, or malicious URL, and Kaspersky stays clean.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for VirusTotal?
I do not know about the pricing or licensing as our organization services VirusTotal for our clients.
What needs improvement with VirusTotal?
I would like to see improvements in the score consistency and accuracy. VirusTotal should add more details like those from competitors such as URL Void or Symantec URL Checker, which show the categ...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about ThreatBook vs. VirusTotal and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.