Google Security Operations vs Splunk SOAR comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Google and Splunk are both solutions in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category. Google is ranked #13 with an average rating of 9.0, while Splunk is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.4. Google holds a 3.4% mindshare in SOAR, compared to Splunk’s 7.0% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of Google users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Splunk users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

Google Security Operations and Splunk SOAR are competitive products in the security operations category. Google Security Operations gains an edge with its seamless integration with Google Cloud services, while Splunk SOAR is recognized for its advanced orchestration capabilities and wide range of integrations.

Features: Google Security Operations offers native integration with Google Cloud, ensuring effective threat detection and response. It excels in automation capabilities and scalable cloud integration. Splunk SOAR stands out with its robust playbook development, extensive third-party integrations, and advanced threat orchestration features, appealing to organizations seeking high flexibility and functionality.

Room for Improvement: Google Security Operations could enhance its non-Google Cloud integrations and expand customization options to cater to diverse business environments. Splunk SOAR can improve by streamlining its complex setup process and enhancing user interface intuitiveness for newer users, while also optimizing resource utilization, particularly in its AI engine.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Google Security Operations offers straightforward deployment, particularly beneficial for Google Cloud users, alongside reliable customer support. Splunk SOAR, while offering excellent support, presents a more complex setup given its extensive customization potential, which may appeal to those with specific organizational needs.

Pricing and ROI: Google Security Operations is considered to have competitive pricing for Google Cloud users, leading to a favorable ROI with its integrated services. Splunk SOAR requires a higher initial investment but promises long-term ROI through its comprehensive feature set, making it a wise choice for businesses prioritizing advanced security capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Google Security Operations vs. Splunk SOAR Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Google Security Operations vs. Splunk SOAR

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 913,806 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 September 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.5%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Security Operations is 3.4%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Splunk SOAR is 7.0%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Splunk SOAR	7.0%
Torq	3.5%
Google Security Operations	3.4%
Other	86.1%

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)

Featured Reviews

AdityaDesai

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.

Read full review

ChaitanyaKajjam

Technical Lead at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Simplified detection rules and SOAR workflows have improved compliance-focused operations

One improvement I am looking for is silent log source monitoring. If some feed or some host went offline or was not pulling any logs into Google Security Operations, I would want better visibility. Silent host monitoring would make a significant difference because it is very hard to track which host went down, and there are many false positives as a result. I think there is a lot of room for scalability improvements, particularly in the integration of third-party applications. Currently, I have to write a script and use a cloud run function to pull logs. If there were direct ingestion by simply providing an API key and some sort of client certificate, it would be much easier.

Read full review

Vikash Kushwaha

Full-Stack Software Engineer at mindpathtech

Automated playbooks have transformed incident response and now protect critical services

The biggest advantage I see from my personal experience as an integrator with Splunk SOAR is that it integrates with most of the security features among the Defenders, Microsoft Defender, firewalls, CloudWatch, and AWS security agents, as well as EC2 machines, firewalls, EDR, IAM, email security, and antivirus. It automates the security process over phishing emails and any other brute force attacks. It helps quite a lot because if 100 phishing emails were sent to a domain, a developer can only reach one, two, or five, but for hundreds of others, it actually supports better automated playbooks and provides major security. Splunk SOAR introduced some new and innovative capabilities or approaches that transformed the way my SOC operates. Splunk SOAR provides playbooks for automatic security features, such as for firewalls, phishing mails, and utilizing Defenders or virtual tools. A playbook maintains its algorithms or processes, so if any kind of security issue arises, the playbook automatically runs and handles actions such as IP blocking or resolving brute force attacks, notifying the admin about suspicious users. After implementing Splunk SOAR, the training process for my SOC team to use playbooks takes a long time during the whole integration part, as it retrieves all credentials from us, whether for an EC2 machine or any antivirus. It takes about one to two months for the team to fully sustain and know the processes of the playbooks and security, particularly for three or four individuals in the cyber security or DevOps team. Splunk SOAR significantly reduces the time spent on monotonous security tasks. In banking, insurance, or healthcare, automated services for addressing phishing emails and security threats are common. Having a manual workforce of two or three individuals can only handle five or ten security threats while Splunk SOAR automates the entire process across apps and machines, making it easier and notifying the admin about the threats. If someone tries to breach, Splunk SOAR immediately processes incoming requests, validating them and blocking any unsecured requests, which reduces a lot of time and effort. With the help of the playbook viewer, I assess the visibility provided by Splunk SOAR as very positive, especially for security purposes. If someone is attacked by 100 users, it blocks all the users, while individual developers such as myself can only handle two or three at a time. The automated process of Splunk SOAR handles all the processes concurrently, making it a game-changing solution. It helps reduce mean time to resolve (MTTR). It takes around 10 to 20 minutes to resolve one incident through the whole process and notify the admin of the issue. If there are multiple incidents, calculating the time taken for each, it generally requires around 40 to 50 minutes to resolve five incidents.

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

"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."

"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."

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

"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."

"According to positive outcomes, Torq reduced manual work and made incident response more efficient."

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

"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."

"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."

More Torq pros

"Without hyperbole, I have never, in my entire career, encountered a vendor or a vendor community as awesome as Siemplify. Siemplify and the Siemplify Community quite literally made it possible for our SOC to increase almost five-fold in our number of clients and number of analysts and to go from a Monday to Friday 9-5 shop to a 24/7 shop all in the span of under a year and a half and all while continually adding capabilities and improving the services we offer to our clients."

"The valuable parts of Google Security Operations include how easy it is to write parsers or detection rules, and it is well-advanced in the analytical part."

"The playbooks feature in Siemplify is crucial for automation. We've utilized both standard and custom integrations with other security operation solutions, enhancing our flexibility. The user interface is generally straightforward, although recent changes may require some adjustment and Siemplify's integrations and capabilities offer potential support for various compliance requirements."

"Google Security Operations helps meet all the important regulatory compliance across all verticals."

"The most valuable feature of Siemplify is the playbooks that can be created."

"Google SecOps is extremely useful for threat detection and hunting."

"Overall, Google SecOps is a very useful service for security operations."

"Integration has made our operations significantly easier, and for phishing investigations, IP checks, and endpoint isolations, our response time to incidents has reduced substantially, and false positives are identified much quicker because of Splunk SOAR."

"The customization of the playbook in Splunk SOAR is very beneficial."

"The most valuable feature of Splunk SOAR that stands out is it has a great SOAR, the automation and orchestration module is highly mature, and a lot of use cases are on user entity and behavioral analytics (UEBA), which is artificial intelligence and machine learning-based (AIML)."

"The visibility for Splunk SOAR is extremely clear and very user-friendly and intuitive."

"I have found all the security automation platform features of Splunk SOAR to be good, and the automation playbook development is highly useful."

"Scalability is the best feature of the solution."

"Before its use, analyzing each email would take at least 15 to 20 minutes, with some complex cases taking up to 30 minutes...With the automation provided by Splunk Phantom, we could significantly reduce the amount of time and human effort required to complete this task."

"Splunk SOAR is more user-friendly than those tools and provides more precise and advanced information that we require to analyze whether a case is a true positive or false positive."

More Splunk SOAR pros

Cons

"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."

"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."

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

"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."

"There are some issues and bugs that I think need to be fixed, but they are currently not focused on it."

"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."

More Torq cons

"We often encounter minor issues that could be improved, but we maintain communication with the developers and submit feature requests. Recently, I requested enhancements such as improved search functionality within playbooks and expanded options for exporting case data."

"I'm inclined to say that I'd love to see some Machine Learning capabilities integrated into the platform, however, I just attended a demo this morning where Siemplify gave a sneak peek into some Machine Learning capabilities that they are currently developing and have roadmapped for release soon."

"Building the playbooks could be easier and the integration could improve. It is a difficult process, such as what API connections need to be made."

"The main improvement could be in the accuracy and detail provided in threat descriptions."

"I can give customer service a rating of six because it is very hard sometimes to keep up with the support."

"Splunk SOAR has room to improve its offering for small-sized customers. The price is not fair for smaller-sized customers."

"From the improvement point of view regarding Splunk SOAR, I suggest including more types of LLM models such as autonomous AI models including Anthropic and Opus 4.6, as well as creating a playground for new users to work on these, which will significantly help solve complex problems and assist new companies in understanding how Splunk works easily."

"There seem to be some features in meshing with Enterprise Security that are lacking, which were easier to do when Splunk SOAR was the workplace for cases."

"I would like to see easier playbook development, better troubleshooting, debugging, and more intuitive improved integrations and documentation, which would also make automation easier to maintain."

"have put a number of ideas on the ideas.splunk.com site for feature requests for the Splunk SOAR product. I posted one of them about three years ago, which finally got implemented in the latest release that just got announced, so the time to implement new features and things like that is a little bit concerning."

"Splunk SOAR could be improved by making playbook development easier for new users and providing better troubleshooting and debugging options."

"The gap for improvement I see is response time because it takes a lot of time to have a response from them."

"Splunk SOAR can improve IoT/OT security-related case studies or your use cases. Their integration with identity and access management (IAM) solutions is a bit shaky. They don't have good integration with a lot of IAM solutions. They do have good capability in terms of user access management internally, but even with privileged user access, they have a good module. However, if they have to integrate with solutions, such as CyberArk or IBM IAM solutions they are lacking, the visibility of user access is not that much."

More Splunk SOAR cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The tool is not cheap."

"The licensing cost is reasonable."

"It's very overpriced because it is based on the number of users. There is no bulk licensing."

"Splunk is a fast enterprise tool, but it costs too much. At the same time, it's worth what we pay, in my opinion. We can efficiently perform all the functions and tie together the data. It's the perfect tool for our needs."

"We renewed it this year. This year was the first time there was a dramatic increase in the price. It was kind of non-negotiable. It was just a high increase. We had internal communications, and it was definitely a surprise to us. In a short time frame, we renewed it this year. Prices are going up everywhere, but they are not always justifiable, at least not to our eyes. The pricing this year was definitely a big shock."

"Splunk SOAR is moderately priced, neither cheap nor overly expensive."

"The cost is high and the licensing is on an annual basis."

"While I can't confirm the exact pricing, some colleagues have mentioned that Splunk SOAR may be on the costlier side."

More Splunk SOAR 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

913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Outsourcing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Outsourcing Company

University

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Outsourcing Company

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	11

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Large Enterprise	3

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	23
Midsize Enterprise	10
Large Enterprise	53

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?

There are some bugs in Torq, of course. They can be present in data transformation, some UI debugging, and other area...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Torq?

My main use case for Torq is the automation of cyber security processes through a SOAR platform and APIs. A main exam...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Torq?

Regarding someone thinking about using Torq, I recommend looking into their provided academy to start working with th...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Siemplify?

The pricing for Google SecOps and Microsoft Sentinel is almost the same, with no significant differences.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Siemplify?

A potential area of improvement for Google Security Operations could be cost. I think Google has already started deve...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Siemplify?

Google Security Operations is the main tool that my clients use for the security operations of their companies.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Splunk Phantom?

For pricing, I would rate Splunk SOAR a seven where one is high price and ten is low price.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Splunk Phantom?

Splunk SOAR could be improved by making playbook development easier for new users and providing better troubleshootin...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Splunk Phantom?

My main use case for Splunk SOAR is automating repetitive SOC tasks and speeding up incident response, and I mainly u...

See all answers

Comparisons

Tines vs Torq

Compared 23% of the time

Blink Ops vs Torq

Compared 13% of the time

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs Torq

Compared 9% of the time

Dropzone AI vs Torq

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiSOAR vs Torq

Compared 3% of the time

More Torq Competitors

Panther vs Google Security Operations

Compared 10% of the time

Microsoft Sentinel vs Google Security Operations

Compared 9% of the time

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs Google Security Operations

Compared 5% of the time

Google Chronicle Suite vs Google Security Operations

Compared 4% of the time

Splunk Enterprise Security vs Google Security Operations

Compared 3% of the time

More Google Security Operations Competitors

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs Splunk SOAR

Compared 11% of the time

Tines vs Splunk SOAR

Compared 8% of the time

Fortinet FortiSOAR vs Splunk SOAR

Compared 7% of the time

ServiceNow Security Operations vs Splunk SOAR

Compared 6% of the time

VMware Carbon Black Cloud vs Splunk SOAR

Compared 6% of the time

More Splunk SOAR Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Torq

August 2026

Download Torq product report

Buyer's Guide

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)

August 2026

Download Google Security Operations product report

Buyer's Guide

Splunk SOAR

August 2026

Download Splunk SOAR product report

Also Known As

No data available

Siemplify ThreatNexus

Phantom

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

Google Security Operations offers a robust playbook builder and integration capabilities designed to streamline workflows and integrate seamlessly with existing systems for enhanced security management.

Google Security Operations stands out in threat detection, monitoring, and alarm management, especially when used alongside Mandiant. Its intuitive interface supports compliance requirements, and it provides customizable workflows through playbooks. Integration with multiple tools allows for automation and increased flexibility, though improvements in API connection determination and playbook search capabilities could enhance user experience. Effective in orchestrating alerts and managing security events, it is extensively used for automated response, efficient alert triage, investigation, reporting, and ticketing management, supporting over 20 use cases including real-time threat detection.

What are the Key Features of Google Security Operations?

Playbook Builder: Allows for creating customizable workflows tailored to specific scenarios.
Integration Capabilities: Facilitates connectivity with numerous tools for automation.
Threat Detection: Improves monitoring and response when combined with Mandiant's capabilities.
Simplicity in Feature Adoption: Easy incorporation of new features and workflows.

What Benefits Should You Look for in Reviews?

Workflow Efficiency: Automates triage and investigation processes for quicker security management.
Real-Time Threat Detection: Enhances monitoring effectiveness in Managed Extended Detection and Response strategies.
Flexibility: Adaptable integrations support dynamic security needs.
Compliance Support: Aids in maintaining regulatory standards with straightforward reporting features.

In industries where real-time threat response is critical, such as finance and healthcare, Google Security Operations is favored for its automation and integration capabilities. These characteristics are vital for efficiently managing complex security landscapes and maintaining compliance across sectors.

Google

Splunk SOAR focuses on automating security operations with seamless third-party integrations and customizable workflows, enhancing incident response and threat management.

Splunk SOAR offers robust playbook automation and powerful API connectivity, allowing organizations to streamline workflows and integrate extensively with tools like Salesforce and ServiceNow. With its capabilities in real-time data visualization and automated threat responses, it significantly enhances security and reduces manual efforts. Users appreciate the ease of creating playbooks, which reduces mean time to detect and resolve. However, attention to its integration challenges with Microsoft products, the need for more playbooks, and improved customization tools is necessary. Enhancements in the development process, visibility, scalability, and case management options are also beneficial. Improving documentation and training resources would add more depth and accessibility.

What are the top features of Splunk SOAR?

Third-party integrations: Supports extensive integration with tools like Salesforce and ServiceNow.
Playbook automation: Facilitates easy creation and management of automated workflows.
Customizable workflows: Offers Python-based customization for tailored security operations.
API connectivity: Powerful API support for seamless tool consolidation and streamlined workflows.
Data visualization: Provides real-time data visualization for enhanced situational awareness.

What benefits or ROI users should consider?

Operational efficiency: Reduces mean time to detect and resolve incidents through automation.
Manual effort reduction: Automates threat responses, minimizing manual workload in security operations.
Enhanced security: Offers end-to-end visibility and automated threat mitigation processes.
Time savings: Optimizes processes and improves response efficiency in cybersecurity operations.

Organizations implement Splunk SOAR in industries to automate tasks in Security Operation Centers, addressing incidents such as phishing, brute force, and ransomware. It integrates with third-party applications for threat intelligence enrichment, commonly deployed both on-premise and cloud, enhancing cybersecurity efforts.

Splunk

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

FedEx Mondelez Intenrational Check Point Trustwave Atos Cyberint Bae Systems Crowe Longwall Security Telefonica Nordea HCL

Recorded Future, Blackstone

Buyer's Guide

Google Security Operations vs. Splunk SOAR

September 2026

Free Report: Google Security Operations vs. Splunk SOAR

Find out what your peers are saying about Google Security Operations vs. Splunk SOAR and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Google Security Operations vs. Splunk SOAR 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.