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

Cyware Cyber Fusion vs IBM Security QRadar comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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

Torq
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Cyware Cyber Fusion
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (27th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (22nd)
IBM Security QRadar
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
218
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (5th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (2nd), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (2nd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (12th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (11th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (10th)
 

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.
AhmedKonsowa - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Pre-Sales Engineer (Commercial Sector) at Cyber Knight
A stable solution with excellent features and a helpful technical support team
We use the solution for cyber fusion centers The product has a lot of strong points compared to other tools. The prices must be reduced. I have been using the solution for one year. I am using the latest version of the solution. I rate the tool’s stability a nine out of ten. In my company,…
HarshBhardiya - PeerSpot reviewer
SOC Engineer at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Have managed daily asset and alert monitoring effectively but have encountered limitations with manual processes and interface usability
It's still very manual and doesn't work on its own. It's still in an early stage and not on par where we can consider it a really successful detection system. The accuracy is not there. The UI could be better when compared to Sentinels where we can use flags and tagging. It could be much more user-friendly. IBM Security QRadar has all features and is fully competitive with other SIEM tools, but when it comes to user-friendliness, a new user takes time to get used to it. More intuitive, user-friendly interfaces and more helpful documentation would be beneficial. The query searching and data fetching could be faster. In large to very large organizations with around 5,000 or 6,000 assets or beyond, even with proper configurations and RAM and hardware backing up, the query is fairly slow.

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."
"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."
"Torq has changed the day-to-day experience for my security analysts and me by saving literally thousands of man-hours per month since we have implemented some of these use cases."
"Torq has definitely changed the day-to-day experience for our security analysts, as they feel more excited and feel that Torq interface and workflow allow them to build things themselves."
"We have seen fewer failures of automations from the time Torq came into the picture, we've had a more streamlined process of handling incidents, and at the same time, we've learned to embed the AI into our incident types, and that is how it has helped us in the automation."
"One of the workflows I manage with Torq looks good and provides faster response, saving time and resulting in happy clients."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"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."
"The product is stable."
"The technical support team is helpful."
"This product helps to build a strong architecture, which is important to avoid problems."
"The solution can scale."
"This is a good tool to have because it gives you the ability to track what is currently happening in your environment."
"I like that it's easy to use and the performance is good."
"For small and medium enterprises, QRadar is the best solution, due to its price and performance."
"Inside IBM QRadar there are a lot of engines that actually work to help us to do the correlation and normalization as well for the logs that we're receiving from multiple devices."
"It provides many options for searching. I can see devices from different vendors, like Cisco, in one interface, which is good for me."
"It is a bit easier to use than other products, such as Splunk or ELK Elasticsearch."
 

Cons

"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"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."
"What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it still provides faster response and saves time."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"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."
"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 tool doesn't integrate well with ServiceNow."
"The prices must be reduced."
"The price is very high."
"The price of this solution is a little bit expensive, so if it were cheaper then it would help."
"I don't look at only the features and benefits; I also look at the price. It is a bit expensive when compared with other solutions. It is expensive for specific deployment topologies, and the decision-makers go for alternatives like ArcSight. It should also have more AI features or capabilities for better threat intelligence. The more it uses machine learning, the better would be the dashboard, analytics, and other things."
"I have noticed the interface has room for improvement."
"The product is good, but one feature they should have is an Elasticsearch. Currently, in QRadar, there are no Elasticsearch criteria."
"Some of the cloud apps need improvement."
"The only downfall of this product would be its price."
"We have had bad experiences with support from IBM. We are not satisfied with the support and they have made me very angry."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"The pricing is always fine."
"The price could be better. I bought a subscription for three years."
"QRadar UBA's price is a little more than street price and could be reduced."
"The price of this solution is reasonable."
"You have a one-time payment, and you also can purchase it for one year as a subscription. We have it on-premise, and we have a permanent license for it. We have to pay for the support on a yearly basis. If you compare its cost with Sentinel for one year, QRadar would seem more expensive, but if you compare its cost over five or ten years, Azure Sentinel will be more expensive than QRadar. If you compare its cost with Sentinel for one year, QRadar would seem more expensive, but if you compare its cost over five or 10 years, Azure Sentinel can be more expensive than QRadar."
"It is cheaper than ArcSight."
"The pricing is good."
"There are different types of subscriptions available. We were on an annual subscription, but our customers typically choose the two years subscription option."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Jun 28, 2015
Qradar vs. ArcSight
Continuing with the SIEM posts we have done at Infosecnirvana, this post is a Head to head comparison of the two Industry leading SIEM products in the market – HP ArcSight and IBM QRadar Both the products have consistently been in the Gartner Leaders Quadrant. Both HP and IBM took over niche SIEM…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
21%
Healthcare Company
11%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise13
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business93
Midsize Enterprise39
Large Enterprise107
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it ...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is for managing IT services and providing faster response.
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would rate Torq a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I chose this rating because customer service is excellent. I suggest to...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 SOC product do you recommend?
For tools I’d recommend: -SIEM- LogRhythm -SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Security QRadar?
I am overall satisfied with the licensing cost for IBM Security QRadar.
 

Also Known As

No data available
CSOL, Fusion and Threat Response, Threat Intelligence eXchange, Security Orchestration and Automation (SOAR)
IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cyware Cyber Fusion vs. IBM Security QRadar and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.