CRITICALSTART vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator comparison

Critical Start and McAfee are both solutions in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category. Critical Start is ranked #26, while McAfee is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.3. Critical Start holds a 1.2% mindshare in SOAR, compared to McAfee’s 1.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Critical Start users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 82% of McAfee users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 2024

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and CRITICALSTART are two strong contenders in the security management sector. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator has an edge in terms of pricing and ROI, while CRITICALSTART's advanced features make it attractive despite its higher cost.

Features: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator centralizes management of security policies, boosts scalability, and integrates with a wide range of security products. CRITICALSTART, on the other hand, focuses on advanced threat detection, intuitive incident response, and versatile security analytics.

Room for Improvement: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator could enhance its threat intelligence and incident response capabilities, provide more personalized customer support, and improve its user interface for better usability. CRITICALSTART may benefit from more competitive pricing, simplified deployment for smaller enterprises, and enhancements to its mobile app's performance.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator has a streamlined deployment process supported by extensive documentation. CRITICALSTART distinguishes itself with a personalized customer service experience and knowledgeable support, offering a more tailored deployment approach.

Pricing and ROI: McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator offers a cost-effective solution known for solid ROI through efficient policy management. In contrast, CRITICALSTART, priced higher, justifies this with robust threat detection and response capabilities, providing significant returns for those valuing security efficiency.

To learn more, read our detailed CRITICALSTART vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

CRITICALSTART vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 900,747 peers since 2012

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

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 CRITICALSTART is 1.2%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is 1.6%, 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
Product	Mindshare (%)
Torq	3.8%
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator	1.6%
CRITICALSTART	1.2%
Other	93.4%

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)

Featured Reviews

AdityaDesai

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.

Read full review

Justin Hadley

Sr. Manager, Security Engineering at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

The transparency of data in the platform is perfect: You see everything as they are seeing it

Their Zero Trust Analytics Platform (ZTAP) engine, which is kind of their correlation engine, is by far and away one of the best in the business. We can filter and utilize different lists to build out different alerts, such as, what to alert on and when not to alert. This engine helps reduce our number of alerts and false positives. The service's Trusted Behavior Registry helps the provider solve every alert. The way that they have it built out is very intelligent. The way every alert comes in, it gets triaged one direction or another. If it is already a false positive, then it is still getting addressed and reviewed on a regular cadence. Also, true positive alerts get escalated to the appropriate personnel. Its mobile app is great. The ability just to be able to quick reference and see what's coming in when you're on the move or go. You don't always need to have your computer or laptop handy, because you can operate it just from the mobile app. It can communicate with analysts, which is great. The mobile app is great at affecting the efficiency of our security operations. Those guys are using it throughout the day, whether that be at the office, home, or off hours. Typically, they triage from the mobile app. Then, if an escalation needs to be done on a computer, they will pull out a computer. We were on the original UI for a few years, so the updated UI has been a refreshing change. It has significantly more ability to filter and translate data, then load that data. It is rather intuitive to click through for some of our junior analysts or interns, especially as we are starting to onboard and teach them different aspects of the security operations team.

Read full review

Binu Haneef

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."

"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."

"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 has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."

"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."

"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."

"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."

"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."

More Torq pros

"After a year of using the service, our expectations have been met in terms of services delivered on time, on budget, and on spec."

"This has been a positive experience and money well spent."

"When I start thinking about if I were to try to light up a SOC, which I've done before and I have no interest in doing, it could be a million dollars a year or more to do that, and for what I am paying them for the managed fees, it's a steal."

"CRITICALSTART makes us much more comfortable with knowing someone else is watching our data and our systems and knowing that professional security people are taking a look at any issues that do arise."

"Customer service and their response are phenomenal. I would give their customer support a nine point five (out of 10). Our easy access to their SOC analyst, sales team, and leadership team instills confidence in me that they are there for us 24/7."

"I also use their mobile app. It's very easy to use and very convenient to be able to respond to alerts wherever you are. I love the app. You can respond and communicate, per ticket, with their SOC in near real-time. The response is very quick."

"The new mobile app is awesome. It is one of the best I've ever seen. It's much better than its predecessor. It's more intuitive, a whole lot easier to navigate and get where you need to go. It's less repetitive and just generally easier to use. It allows me to not have to be sitting at my computer all the time. I can be on my phone or tablet or wherever I'm at. It makes it a lot easier to answer tickets and do that kind of thing."

"The quick interaction between the agents is the most valuable feature. If we have questions, they're quick to answer. If we make a change to our system, they quickly make the changes that are necessary to filter the logs correctly."

More CRITICALSTART pros

"The solution's best part is that it is very easy to manage McAfee Agent."

"It is a highly scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."

"Many organizations will find the solution has many features that would suit their needs and reduce the number of issues they face."

"The valuable feature of the McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is the management of the policies."

"You have to have some experience, however, it's pretty simple to understand."

"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 general endpoint protection is valuable, and it is easy to manage."

"The policy auditing, policy management, and device auditing are all valuable features. Our customers appreciated the ability to get alerts to system-wide events from a single view."

More McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."

"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 the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."

"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."

More Torq cons

"The only thing I can think of that I would like to see, and I'm sure they could work this into a service pretty easily, is not only alerts on issues that are affecting my company, but some threat intelligence of a general nature on what's out there in the environment. That might be a nice add-in."

"The biggest room for improvement is not necessarily in their service or offering, but in the products that they support."

"They could dig a little bit deeper into the Splunk alerts when they feel like they need to be escalated to us. For example, if a locked account shows up, they could do a little extra digging to verify that the locked account was due to a bad password on the local system. They could just do a little extra digging within the Splunk environment instead of pushing it onto us to go do that extra little digging."

"They just did a user interface overhaul to the website portal that you use for troubleshooting tickets. The old one was fine. The new one is not intuitive and I hate it."

"They could dig a little bit deeper into the Splunk alerts when they feel like they need to be escalated to us."

"It costs a lot for what we felt comfortable to spend."

"The updated UI is actually pretty bad. Regarding the intuitiveness, it is fairly easy to use, but the responsiveness, on a scale of one to 10, is a one. It's really poor performance."

"During the six-month integration and rollout, there were some bumpy roads along the way. There were communication breakdowns between the project manager, CRITICALSTART leadership, and us (as the customer). I expressed my displeasure during the integration in their inability to effectively communicate when there were holdups or issues. They were going through some growing pains at that time, but they have been right there for us ever since."

More CRITICALSTART cons

"McAfee should improve in terms of customer support and assigning a knowledgeable TAM to customers."

"The areas of concern where improvements are needed are related to the product's assignment policy and tag assignment, where users can assign the policies with the help of tags and sort out the systems."

"There are some issues relating to the automation of reports. That's why I wanted the DLP reports. There are some problems in this area. Sometimes it does not work even though all the configuration words are right. There are also some problems with automatic updates."

"Some drawbacks include difficulty in supporting improvements because we don't get proper response from Trellix support, so there is a need to improve the support."

"The rollout to cover the online resources, such as SharePoint, One Drive, and Office 365 doesn't seem to have a very clear path."

"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade its technology since the solution's EDR function is not good compared to other vendors in the market."

"The technical support is pretty poor."

"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the impact of the agent on the endpoint's performance - the resources it takes."

More McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"It costs a lot for what we felt comfortable to spend."

"There are contractual penalties if their SLAs are not met. This commitment was very important in our decision to go with this service, because not having downtime is extremely important to us. The providers has not missed an SLA in the 18 months that I have worked with them."

"I've told CRITICALSTART that I think the managed service they provide is cheaper than it should be. It's a really good deal."

"As far as the expense goes, it's very competitive pricing and the services you get are almost like you have a person on your team."

"The pricing of other services was so insane that they weren't even an option."

"Overall, for what I'm paying for it, and the benefit I'm getting out of it, it is right where it needs to be, if not a little bit in my favor. For what it costs me to actually have this service, I could afford one internal person to do that job, but now I have a team of 10 or more who are doing that job, and they don't sleep because they work shifts."

"The pricing has always been competitive. They have always been good to us. They will make it a fight. They don't try to hide anything; it's always been fully transparent and well-worth what we pay for it."

"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 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."

"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is not an expensive solution."

"There is a license required to use this solution. If we use the additional components, such as DLP encryption, there is an additional cost. However, it is similar to a separate product altogether. If you want to use that or not, it is optional, but when you use it, it will cost you additional pricing."

"This solution is priced in the mid-range."

"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."

"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."

"It's an expensive solution"

More McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Construction Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	4

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	19

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee MVISION ePO?

It's an expensive solution.

See all answers

What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION ePO?

There is a question regarding suggestions for additional tools or functions for McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, and whet...

See all answers

Comparisons

Tines vs Torq

Compared 27% of the time

Splunk SOAR vs Torq

Compared 14% of the time

Blink Ops vs Torq

Compared 11% of the time

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs Torq

Compared 10% of the time

Swimlane vs Torq

Compared 8% of the time

More Torq Competitors

ServiceNow Security Operations vs CRITICALSTART

Compared 12% of the time

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs CRITICALSTART

Compared 9% of the time

SentinelOne Wayfinder Threat Detection and Response vs CRITICALSTART

Compared 8% of the time

Binary Defense MDR vs CRITICALSTART

Compared 7% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon Complete MDR vs CRITICALSTART

Compared 4% of the time

More CRITICALSTART Competitors

Splunk SOAR vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 16% of the time

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 15% of the time

GTB Technologies Inspector vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 8% of the time

Elastic Security vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 7% of the time

Symantec Data Loss Prevention vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Compared 6% of the time

More McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Torq

May 2026

Download Torq product report

Buyer's Guide

CRITICALSTART

June 2026

Download CRITICALSTART product report

Buyer's Guide

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

June 2026

Download McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator product report

Also Known As

No data available

Critical Start, CriticalStart

McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO

Overview

Torq is the enterprise AI SOC solution that effectively combines adaptive insights and automation to handle critical threats efficiently. It manages threat lifecycles, swiftly moving from triage to response, ensuring effective risk management.

Torq is designed to streamline security operations by aggregating telemetry across your security stack. It investigates significant risks and manages threats from triage to containment and remediation. This AI-driven tool enhances the capabilities of your SecOps team, allowing them to achieve more impactful results without introducing complicated processes.

What are the key features of Torq?

Adaptive Agentic Insights: Provides real-time threat intelligence tailored to specific security challenges.
Automation: Automates responses to security incidents, minimizing manual intervention requirements.
Threat Lifecycle Management: Comprehensive handling of threats from detection to remediation.
Telemetry Aggregation: Integrates data across platforms for a unified security overview.

Why consider Torq based on reviews?

Efficiency: Users notice significant reductions in time spent managing threats.
Risk Reduction: Enhanced ability to identify and address critical threats promptly.
Resource Optimization: Allows teams to allocate effort to other critical tasks by reducing manual security operations.
Scalability: Adaptable to meet the demands of growing or changing infrastructures.

In industries like finance and healthcare, Torq shows effectiveness by adapting to specific risk scenarios often encountered in these fields. Its integration with existing infrastructures makes it a valuable asset for maintaining stringent security standards, essential for protecting critical data and operations in diverse high-stakes environments.

Torq

CRITICALSTART enhances cybersecurity through advanced alert management, expert guidance, and a user-friendly interface. It promotes efficient monitoring and response to alerts, utilizing a Zero Trust model for heightened security.

CRITICALSTART is designed for organizations seeking to manage security alerts and streamline monitoring processes. Known for its quick response times and efficient alert filtering, it integrates tools like Cylance and Carbon Black to offer managed detection and response services. Users experience enhanced security by focusing on critical threats while the platform's easy navigation aids in efficiently responding to alerts. Improvement areas include better alert prioritization, enhanced compliance disclosure, and smoother integration with third-party communication tools.

What are the key features of CRITICALSTART?

Alert Management: Efficient handling and filtering of alerts to minimize noise.
Expert Guidance: Insights for integrating SIEM and optimizing response strategies.
Mobile Access: Easy access through a mobile app to manage alerts on the go.
Zero Trust Model: Enhances security by minimizing unnecessary access and noise.
User-Friendly Interface: Seamless navigation enhances user interaction and response times.

What advantages and ROI should users consider?

Improved Security Confidence: Advanced alert handling promotes a secure environment.
Increased Efficiency: Streamlined monitoring allows focus on critical threats.
Expert Insight: Professional guidance enhances security strategies and operations.
Quick Response Times: Rapid handling of threats reduces potential impacts.

In industry applications, organizations use CRITICALSTART to bolster cybersecurity measures across finance, healthcare, and technology sectors. Managed detection services and third-party integration make it suitable for enterprises looking to optimize security operations and minimize alert fatigue while ensuring 24/7 monitoring and protection.

Critical Start

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator centralizes cybersecurity management, providing a unified platform for antivirus and data loss prevention with integrated analytics and reporting capabilities. It enhances policy oversight and threat detection across diverse IT environments.

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator offers centralized management for robust network and endpoint security. Its scalable platform includes advanced threat prevention, encryption, and application control. With its intuitive console, it simplifies management of policies across devices. Challenges include improvements in automation, reporting, licensing clarity, and compatibility with modern technologies, often impacting system performance. Despite this, its centralized interface efficiently manages device control, antivirus, data loss prevention, and threat intelligence, offering custom insights for better compliance visibility.

What are the key features of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator?

Centralized Management: Streamlines security across endpoints from a single platform.
Intuitive Console: Simplifies navigation and administration for users.
Robust Antivirus and DLP: Provides comprehensive threats and data protection.
Advanced Analytics: Enhances insights into security data for proactive measures.
Scalability: Accommodates growing security needs of IT environments.
Extensive Automation: Facilitates efficient reporting and segmentation tasks.

What benefits should users expect from McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator?

Enhanced Compliance: Customized reporting improves visibility into regulatory adherence.
Threat Detection: Advanced analytics aid in identifying potential threats.
Centralized Policy Management: Simplifies control over security policies.
Integration Capabilities: Seamlessly integrates with existing IT systems.

In industries requiring meticulous data protection and compliance, such as finance and healthcare, McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is implemented to manage endpoint security, alleviate data security risks, and ensure adherence to strict regulatory standards. Users benefit from its powerful capabilities in managing network logs and automating security tasks.

McAfee

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

Buyer's Guide

CRITICALSTART vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

June 2026

Free Report: CRITICALSTART vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator

Find out what your peers are saying about CRITICALSTART vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CRITICALSTART vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator report.

See our list of best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) vendors.

We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.