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

McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs Splunk SOAR comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
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
Splunk SOAR
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is 1.8%, up from 0.7% 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
ProductMindshare (%)
Splunk SOAR7.0%
Torq3.5%
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator1.8%
Other87.7%
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.
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.
Vikash Kushwaha - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Torq offers the best feature through integration with AI."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"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."
"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."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"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."
"According to positive outcomes, Torq reduced manual work and made incident response more efficient."
"I like McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator software; it is great centralized security management software that allows management of various McAfee products on the client computers and makes risk and compliance management in the organization simpler and more reliable."
"From a single dashboard, I can take a look at several things including the endpoint protection, the file integrity section, the data activity monitor, and more."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is its general purpose of protecting our endpoints from infections, malicious files, and all those kinds of things. The fact that there are organized policies and policy inheritance. The general management."
"Regarding malware, it's great at detecting viruses and malware; we haven't had the problem for the last ten years."
"Many organizations will find the solution has many features that would suit their needs and reduce the number of issues they face."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the central management console, which is used for DLP, endpoint security, drive encryption, and application control."
"It is a scalable solution...I rate its scalability a nine out of ten."
"The solution’s dashboard is really good and customizable. It also has a good UI."
"Splunk SOAR helps reduce my mean time to detect significantly and enhances it very well; it reduces the mean time to detect by approximately 70%."
"Since deploying Splunk SOAR, there has been a notable reduction in time spent on monotonous security tasks, which I estimate to be around 95%, enabling my team to focus on more strategic initiatives."
"We decided to use Splunk SOAR because it's a powerful, reliable engine that has significantly improved our SOC operations, especially in terms of incident response time and scaling features."
"The most valuable features are the Splunk SOAR apps and playbooks."
"Scalability is the best feature of the solution."
"Workflow management is most valuable. It is easily customizable"
"The solution allows us to customize playbooks and incorporate custom code, allowing us to drag and drop elements while still writing code to build the integrations we need."
 

Cons

"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."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"I wish Torq's AI assistant for building templated workflows from scratch worked better; when you start with a blank slate, asking AI to help you build or template the workflow out does not go well."
"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."
"There are some issues and bugs that I think need to be fixed, but they are currently not focused on it."
"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."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"The installation process is quite difficult and requires technical support."
"Lacks a single plug-in for multiple uses."
"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."
"The rollout to cover the online resources, such as SharePoint, One Drive, and Office 365 doesn't seem to have a very clear path."
"The Virtual Patching feature needs to be improved."
"It's a little bit complex to configure it, but when you start using it, it is much easier. There are many policies that you need to create, and in three or four places"
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade its technology since the solution's EDR function is not good compared to other vendors in the market."
"We need to consolidate multiple features into one console. It would be beneficial to have all the important features on a single platform."
"Splunk SOAR follows very flat pricing and most of the time it's very high when compared to the other competitors."
"Technical support can be improvised more. That is one area where I feel the team is sometimes struggling."
"The font used in the interface could be changed and made easier to read."
"Splunk SOAR could be improved with a more intuitive user interface, better playbooks, and more detailed documentation."
"The algorithm and machine learning have room for improvement and can be more user-friendly."
"It would be ideal for us if Splunk SOAR could integrate with Teams."
"The Splunk SOAR case management feature lacks some of the functionalities like the possibility to fully customize the fields for the tickets/events and create custom statuses."
"They can improve on what they are currently doing. They can provide more playbooks or at least template playbooks that are in their repository."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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 tries to package different things into different products, then sell them as different products with different licenses. They just split everything up into multiple things. That's just their sales pitch and how they do it."
"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."
"It is attractively priced. It is a fraction of what we're going to pay for CrowdStrike or SentinelOne, but it only has a fraction of the capabilities as well."
"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."
"$The price of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is expensive, it is approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per license annually."
"This solution is priced in the mid-range."
"The tool is not cheap."
"Splunk SOAR is more expensive compared to other options for SOAR."
"In my opinion, the price is high, but if you want good products, you have to be willing to pay for them."
"I found the price of Splunk SOAR to be good."
"It's very overpriced because it is based on the number of users. There is no bulk licensing."
"While I can't confirm the exact pricing, some colleagues have mentioned that Splunk SOAR may be on the costlier side."
"Splunk SOAR is an expensive solution for an organization of our size."
"The licensing cost is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
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
8%
Outsourcing Company
16%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise53
 

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...
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...
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...
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.
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.
What needs improvement with Splunk Phantom?
Splunk SOAR could be improved by making playbook development easier for new users and providing better troubleshootin...
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...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
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
Recorded Future, Blackstone
Find out what your peers are saying about McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator vs. Splunk SOAR and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.