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

IBM Resilient vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator 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)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
IBM Resilient
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
19th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (7th)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.6%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Resilient is 2.3%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is 1.7%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Torq3.6%
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator1.7%
IBM Resilient2.3%
Other92.4%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

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.
ZaidHaddad - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Seller at Alawtad group
Suitable for different industries and ensures effective incident response
IBM Resilient is great in many aspects like its wide range of integrations and customizable playbooks. However, one thing to improve is how it handles data formats, which currently might require scripting for conversion to CSV before uploading. Despite this, it stands out for incident response, case management, task organization, and team collaboration, making it a strong choice for organizations compared to competitors like Demisto Palo Alto. When it comes to additional features, I think IBM Resilient is on the right track with its AI capabilities, like linking related incidents and providing recommended actions. It would be nice to see more enhancements in this area, but overall, it looks good.
Binu Haneef - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

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."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"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's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable features of IBM Resilient are its flexibility and customization options for incident response."
"The integration with IBM SIM and the ability to block users during brute force attacks are particularly effective."
"As a whole, the product is stable...Technical support is very good."
"The solution is reliable in our usage."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It's really simple and has a flexible interface."
"The UBA, User Behavior Analytics, is very good."
"The most valuable thing about it is how easy it is to navigate the user interface."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the central management console, which is used for DLP, endpoint security, drive encryption, and application control."
"We previously used Symantec, and if we compare it to McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is better."
"The solution is extremely stable; we haven't had any issues whatsoever, and even though there are often false positives, it is easy to fix them in the logs."
"Application control and traffic encryption are the most valuable features."
"I really like the auditing component because it really looks at exactly what has happened on the network."
"Regarding malware, it's great at detecting viruses and malware; we haven't had the problem for the last ten years."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"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."
 

Cons

"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 stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"Torq can be improved by adding some more features, such as adding more automation and providing a no-code option so I don't have to code for everything."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"Regarding the pricing of Torq, I would say it is expensive."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"It is not very straightforward to set up custom integrations, especially with services like Azure. You need an additional server for integration."
"IBM Resilient is quite complex, including its configuration."
"Integrating IBM Resilient with other applications can be very difficult and technically challenging. Often, they use the excuse that you are using the latest version of an application, such as an endpoint security system, and they don't have an API or support for it at the moment. There is no automation in the SOAR solution."
"What could make IBM Resilient better is if IBM increased the number of built-in integrations with different products from other vendors or third-party products."
"Its price and technical support need improvement."
"The integration could be improved so that it is easy to integrate with other solutions."
"The product needs a bit more development."
"The product must provide more integration with other tools."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade its technology since the solution's EDR function is not good compared to other vendors in the market."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade the technology; it's like their area function is not quite as good as compared to other market vendors."
"The impact of the agent on the endpoint's performance - the resources it takes. Additionally, the difficulties we experience with inheriting and breaking inheritance on the organization's structure breakdown for policy inheritance and then for rules inheritance. We are actually struggling with this."
"The solution could improve the EDR component in many areas, such as the zero-day and persistent threats. The implementation is also complex for this feature."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator should improve its integration with other tools."
"We would like to see more integration with different platforms and extend this to other platforms. We are migrating to the cloud and want to extend it from our on-premises setup to the cloud."
"We need to consolidate multiple features into one console. It would be beneficial to have all the important features on a single platform."
"The solution is difficult to tune to avoid false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"There are no costs except for the support services that our company pays in addition to the licensing charges attached to the solution."
"Pricing for the solution is good, in my opinion."
"I feel it is an expensive product when my company pays annually for renewal, support, and follow-up."
"The licensing cost for IBM Resilient is not too expensive, but it's not affordable, so it's moderately expensive. Regarding price, I'm rating the solution seven out of ten. The company pays for the license yearly, based on the number of users. Apart from the cost of the license you need to pay for each user, you also need to spend an initial investment for the base platform. You also have to pay for IBM Resilient support."
"There is a license you need to pay for in order to use this product."
"It is very expensive."
"I would rate the tool’s pricing a three out of ten. The tool’s pricing is on a yearly basis."
"We could create unlimited users using the license we had purchased."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a three out of ten."
"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."
"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 ePolicy Orchestrator is not an expensive solution."
"This solution is priced in the mid-range."
"$The price of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is expensive, it is approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per license annually."
"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."
"It's an expensive solution"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Construction Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Government
7%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
The only thing is more out-of-the-box integrations. Torq already has a lot of supported integrations and adding new o...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
For Torq, first of all, it's a hyperautomation and AI assistant usage. Our EDR SentinelOne is integrated in Torq and ...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I think I have told everything about Torq that I can share at this stage, but I am still in the process of learning t...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Resilient?
I am not the one in charge of pricing, so I am not sure about the costs.
What needs improvement with IBM Resilient?
Integration with some devices, including Cisco PowerPower and certain antivirus products, has limitations.
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...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION ePO?
There is a question regarding suggestions for additional tools or functions for McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, and whet...
What is your primary use case for McAfee MVISION ePO?
The question pertains to describing the use case and process for which people utilize McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator.
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Golden Living, Health Equity, USA Funds
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
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Resilient vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.