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

Exabeam vs ThreatQ comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 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)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (7th), AI-Powered Security Automation (2nd)
Exabeam
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (15th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Security Incident Response (5th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (10th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (10th)
ThreatQ
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
21st
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (15th)
 

Featured Reviews

Nimrod Vardi - PeerSpot reviewer
Global IT Director at OpenWeb
Automation workflows have transformed our IT, enabling secure just-in-time access control
We work with them quite often, so we have a direct line regarding areas in Torq that have room for improvement. If we have a feature request, we can request it. I do not have anything in mind at the moment. We were a design partner for a short while, so we feel that they listen and that users of the system have an impact on the way the system is designed for the better. They have a new community, which is something that I personally suggested years ago. There are many people like me in different places and they might have already built the workflow that I need. Having the option to share workflows or to jump on a thread and say I have this need, did anyone ever build a workflow for it, is amazing. Someone would jump in and say yes, sure, here, take this workflow. I think this is an amazing thing and I really hope that the community will come alive because I think this is really powerful. This is something that I already suggested and it did happen eventually, and I am quite happy with it. I do not have any specific feature in mind that I have a need for at the moment.
DH
Solution Architect at CTC
Improved threat detection has provided clear user risk insights and streamlined incident response
Exabeam's UEBA is the most valuable feature that I have found so far. 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. Exabeam's automation for incident response is very good. The machine learning capabilities of Exabeam are also good.
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

"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."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"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."
"The ThreatHunter in Advanced Analytics is the most valuable. It helps analyze compromised assets and provides analysis for any entity within my client's environment."
"The user interface and the timelines they use are the most valuable features. The price model is very simple so that one can understand it easily and there are no surprises within it."
"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. It pulls a lot of information together, for example, everything a user does in a specific timeframe. It's quite helpful."
"The way it can connect with AWS is very useful, and the integrations are pretty good."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Exabeam is the timeline creation based on log sources, which helps in security investigations."
"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

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"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."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"One area for the solution's improvement is integration capabilities, particularly out-of-the-box integration which sometimes requires additional professional services."
"Exabeam should be a bit faster, especially in loading and vulnerability scanning."
"We had a large volume right from the beginning and they weren't quite prepared for that. That's something that they should think about when it comes to customers that have a large volume to start off with."
"Exabeam needs to improve its documentation and provide more customization for dashboards and case management."
"They should provide detailed information about detecting phishing emails."
"We use the on-prem Exabeam product and face limitations using the web UI and administration of custom models and rules."
"Updating the new release of Exabeam Fusion SIEM takes time and slows our performance."
"Exabeam's reporting dashboard could have included a filtering option to filter by the most recent detection."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"Exabeam Fusion SIEM's pricing is reasonable."
"There is an annual license required to use Exabeam Fusion SIEM. The price of the solution should be reduced."
"The platform is not extremely expensive compared to its direct competitors; I would rate its pricing around six out of ten."
"The solution is expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
Regarding the downsides of Torq, one issue is that as a SaaS product, I sometimes encounter transparency issues about...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My role is Cyber Security Engineer, and we use Torq for our case management platform, automating some of our phishing...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
Torq's maintenance requirements depend on how you define maintenance. While Torq handles the platform's overall relia...
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 do not have much information about the pricing. However, I am aware that Exabeam is cheaper than Palo Alto based on...
What needs improvement with Exabeam Fusion SIEM?
We use the on-prem Exabeam product and face limitations using the web UI and administration of custom models and rule...
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 to...
What is your primary use case for ThreatQ?
We used the solution for threat mapping and managing IoCs.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Hulu, ADP, Safeway, BBCN Bank
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Exabeam vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.