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

AWS Security Hub vs Exabeam comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 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)
AWS Security Hub
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (11th)
Exabeam
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (14th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Security Incident Response (5th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (9th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (9th)
 

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 AWS Security Hub is 5.7%, down from 9.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Exabeam is 3.1%, up from 1.8% 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%
AWS Security Hub5.7%
Exabeam3.1%
Other87.4%
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.
Karthik Ekambaram - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at Scybers
Has helped identify misconfigurations and prioritize risks but lacks multi-cloud support and deeper integration features
AWS Security Hub cannot scale up to multiple different cloud environments; it only works for AWS. There are other products in the market for CSPM that can give you multi-cloud environment misconfigurations, even Microsoft for that matter. Regarding the integration of AWS Security Hub with third-party tools, I am not certain whether we can integrate them, but there is no need to do so. However, AWS Security Hub cannot integrate with other cloud providers, so it only supports the AWS environment. The compliance checks within AWS Security Hub are good, but we don't use them much. We utilize compliance frameworks such as CIS compliance frameworks and ISO 27017 framework, which are beneficial, but it can improve in other areas too, such as including NIST and other frameworks beyond just ISO and CIS. Improvements can be applicable for scalability, particularly on integration with multi-cloud environments, and compliance frameworks can be added for more variety as well. The unified dashboard in AWS Security Hub is adequate; I cannot say it is exceptional, but the content available in the dashboards is satisfactory for now.
reviewer2265966 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise Account Manager South at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Advanced analytics have transformed our threat detection and streamlined incident investigations
I would appreciate seeing additional dashboards in Exabeam Fusion SIEM or perhaps more options or the ability to customize them further. While we can customize them currently, there may be additional options available. I value the outcomes navigator because it matches the log piece to the use cases, which is helpful. The correlation rules are excellent. I am interested in whether there are additional threat intelligence feeds available that we could use, whether we can integrate our own, or if we could ingest different ones.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"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."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"Cloudposse is a valuable feature as it guarantees my security."
"The platform has valuable features for security."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easy to manage...It is a scalable solution."
"The advantage is that it is cloud-native, and we do not need to install agents or sensors to find findings."
"I really like the seamless integration with the AWS account structure. It can even be made mandatory as part of the landing zone. These are great features. And there's a single pane of glass for the entire account."
"This solution is for security posture management for the cloud, showing the security posture of your cloud infrastructure and giving you good insight into whether your infrastructure is secure or not."
"Easily integrates with third-party tools"
"AWS Security Hub brings many features into one table that is quite useful, and the app team finds it easier to see what is missing."
"The platform is not extremely expensive compared to its direct competitors; I would rate its pricing around six out of ten."
"The solution's automation capabilities are great."
"Exabeam has improved our organization by speeding up the investigation process."
"Exabeam Fusion SIEM has a good performance and more advantages than traditional solutions."
"Valuable features are its timeline based analysis and that it's user friendly."
"Exabeam's UEBA displays the type of description that it could show in a console regarding one particular user, the rating that it shows, and how vulnerable the user is, which is very good."
"I have customers that like the EUBA functionality of it; the solution has the ability to build a session, basically, pulling a lot of information together, for example, everything a user does in a specific timeframe, which is quite helpful."
"The most valuable feature of Exabeam Fusion SIEM is the easy-to-use user interface."
 

Cons

"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."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"The telemetry doesn't always go into the control center. When you have multiple instances running in AWS, you need a control tower to take feeds from Security Hub and analyze your results. Sometimes exemptions aren't passed between the control tower and Security Hub. The configuration gets mixed up or you don't get the desired results."
"The solution will only give you insight if you have configure rule enabled. It should work more like Prisma Cloud and Dome9 which have a better approach."
"Security needs to be measured based on their own criteria. We can't add custom criteria specific to our organization. For example, having an S3 bucket publicly available might be flagged as a critical alert, but it might not be critical in a sandbox environment. So, it gets flagged as critical, which becomes a false positive. So, customization options and creating custom dashboards would be areas for improvement."
"I would like a more fine-grained capability for creating custom rules and a more user-friendly experience programmatically in writing queries and configuring custom security rules, making it quicker and easier."
"Security Hub is currently not worth investing in, as it requires more configurations and integration with other services to work effectively."
"It is not flexible for multi-cloud environments."
"Shortening the response time for support tickets, particularly in production issues, could make the service more efficient."
"The user interface, graphs, and dashboards of the solution could improve in the future. They are not very sophisticated and could use an update."
"The only problem is that the UI is not very impressive."
"They need to focus on more of the MITRE ATT&CK Framework and coverage. They claim they cover about 70 to 80%. I'm not sure if it's really quite that much, however."
"We still have questions surrounding hardware deployment."
"I tried to send an email, however, no one has replied."
"One area for the solution's improvement is integration capabilities, particularly out-of-the-box integration which sometimes requires additional professional services."
"One area that needs improvement is interacting with Exabeam's API. There was a headache regarding the API; the documentation wasn't clear, and the syntax wasn't very precise."
"I would say the pricing for Exabeam Fusion SIEM is not cost prohibitive, but it was a little more than I initially thought."
"The customer service and support are not satisfactory."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The price of the solution is not very competitive but it is reasonable."
"There are multiple subscription models, like yearly, monthly, and packaged."
"The price of AWS Security Hub is average compared to other solutions."
"Security Hub is not an expensive solution."
"AWS Security Hub's pricing is pretty reasonable."
"The cost is based on the number of compliances, core checks, and services required, and for more than 10,000 recommendations, the charge is just one dollar."
"The pricing is fine. It is not an expensive tool."
"AWS Security Hub is not an expensive tool. I would consider it to be a cheap solution. AWS Security Hub follows the PAYG pricing model, meaning you will have to pay for whatever you use."
"There is an annual license required to use Exabeam Fusion SIEM. The price of the solution should be reduced."
"Exabeam Fusion SIEM's pricing is reasonable."
"The solution is expensive."
"Exabeam is not a cheap solution."
"They have a great model for pricing that can be based either on user count or gigabits per day."
"The platform is not extremely expensive compared to its direct competitors; I would rate its pricing around six out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186927 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Operations at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Feb 16, 2015
Cybereason vs. Interset vs. SQRRL
Capture DB - they all use NoSQL db and hence solve the ad hoc query and 'go back in time' problem with current best of breed SIEM and DLP solutions that rely on real time analysis of incoming logs (and don't store them). This means deeper and quicker iterative threat analysis and assessment…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
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 Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise7
 

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 - Azure Sentinel or AWS Security Hub?
We like that Azure Sentinel does not require as much maintenance as legacy SIEMs that are on-premises. Azure Sentinel...
What needs improvement with AWS Security Hub?
I do not see any areas for improvement in AWS Security Hub itself, but the cost factor is something that is the main ...
What is your primary use case for AWS Security Hub?
AWS Security Hub is something I have used daily as it is a part of my job for cloud security purposes. If you are dea...
What are the biggest differences between Securonix UEBA, Exabeam, and IBM QRadar?
It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendli...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Exabeam Fusion SIEM?
I would say the pricing for Exabeam Fusion SIEM is not cost prohibitive, but it was a little more than I initially th...
What needs improvement with Exabeam Fusion SIEM?
I would appreciate seeing additional dashboards in Exabeam Fusion SIEM or perhaps more options or the ability to cust...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SQRRL
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Edmunds, Frame.io, GoDaddy, Realtor.com
Hulu, ADP, Safeway, BBCN Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Security Hub vs. Exabeam and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.