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

Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs ReversingLabs comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 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

Group-IB Threat Intelligence
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
20th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReversingLabs
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
28th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (38th), Anti-Malware Tools (40th), Container Security (50th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (25th), Software Supply Chain Security (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) category, the mindshare of Group-IB Threat Intelligence is 1.9%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReversingLabs is 2.1%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Group-IB Threat Intelligence1.9%
ReversingLabs2.1%
Other96.0%
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
 

Featured Reviews

Abdelrahman Hussein - PeerSpot reviewer
CTI & Threat Hunter at Telecom Egypt
Easy to setup, highly stable and scalable and efficiently tracks threat actors and analyze their tactics
We use Group-IB Threat Intelligence to help us with threat hunting, incident response, and vulnerability management We have found the site intelligence features to be the most valuable. We are able to use these features to track threat actors and analyze their tactics, techniques, and procedures…
TC
Forensic Lead, Global Security Fusion Center at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Very good malware and goodware repository and enables us to look more deeply at indicators of compromise
The automated static analysis of malware is the most valuable feature. Its detection abilities are very good. It hits all of the different platforms out there, platforms that see the items in the wild. Also, the solution’s object and file analysis provide us with actionable insights. Its malware and goodware repository is very good. It's very robust. It gets all of the different repositories that are out there that do analysis and brings them under one roof where we can statically analyze for those indicators of compromise and look at them more deeply. If we need to go deeper into things, we can do that.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have found the site intelligence features to be the most valuable."
"The totality of the recordings is quite important. The networks, the new threat actors, the new methods, tactics, techniques, and procedures."
"The cost of the solution versus the cost of an incident that may have been prevented with it shows a very high ROI."
"Threat Intelligence's best feature is threat activation."
"Threat Intelligence is very stable."
"The most valuable Group-IB Threat Intelligence features are their detections, especially in terms of account and card information leakage. This data sets Group-IB apart from some of the competition."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the sandbox."
"We have complete faith that it can do that for us, and can do it at scale."
"The automated static analysis of malware is the most valuable feature. Its detection abilities are very good. It hits all of the different platforms out there, platforms that see the items in the wild."
"We had nothing in the environment to do such analysis, so it's been a savior in many ways."
"As far as static analysis information is concerned, we use most of the information that is available in order to determine whether or not we might be dealing with a malware variant. This includes information that is related to Java rules. This is also related to malware families indicated or specific malicious software variants that are labeled by name."
"As far as the malware repository is concerned, it's extensive. It's a good source for finding samples, where we are unable to find them on other channels or by leveraging other sources."
"ReversingLabs has a large sample size."
"It offers reports on a great many more file types than the other analysis solutions we have. It can give us a more in-depth analysis and better reporting on a larger number of file types. It also gives us a more comprehensive score on a number of things as well, and that's why we're using it as a front-end filter. It gives us more information... It's valuable because of its depth of information, as well as the breadth it gives us. There aren't a lot of tools that cover all of the different file types."
"As far as the availability of the content is generally concerned and the number of malicious programs that can be looked up in the repository, these are very extensive."
 

Cons

"Group-IB Threat Intelligence should improve integration for SIEM and SOAR solutions."
"The lack of appliance-based or on-premise options for this solution is its biggest downfall. Clients request them often."
"As the landscape evolves, they could provide a little more detail or specificity to map it to the MITRE ATT&CK framework."
"Threat Intelligence's OT security could be improved."
"The web intelligence could be improved. It is not as good as the intelligence from other solutions."
"We would really like further integration with our threat intelligence platform, which is called ThreatConnect. We would also really like further integrations with an endpoint protection product we use called Tanium. The reason I mentioned both of these is that ReversingLabs claims to have extensive integrations with both of them, but they did not work for us."
"The solution needs to improve integrations."
"I would like to see if we could do a little bit more of bulk uploading of hash sets. Right now, I can only do them individually."
"The product support could be better at times. Sometimes, the resources that they provide could be of higher quality."
"While the company is very helpful, it would be very much appreciated to have extensive proof of concept scripts for the different APIs available, though not for all the APIs that we have purchased. Respective scripts are available, but those scripts which are available are typically not of very high quality."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Threat Intelligence is costly, but it gives value for money."
"Group-IB Threat Intelligence's pricing is reasonable."
"The pricing is alright. It's right on the mark."
"We have a yearly contract based on the number of queries and malicious programs which can be processed."
"Currently, the license number of lookups that we purchased has not been reached yet, because the integration has only recently been completed. However, our usage is expected and planned to increase over the next couple of months."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
ReversingLabs Titanium, ReversingLabs secure.software
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Financial services, healthcare, government, manufacturing, oil & gas, telecommunications, information technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs. ReversingLabs and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.