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

Splunk SOAR vs StrikeReady comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Splunk SOAR
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (1st)
StrikeReady
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (19th), AI-Powered Security Automation (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Splunk SOAR7.0%
Microsoft Sentinel9.1%
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR8.8%
Other75.1%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
AI-SOC Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
StrikeReady2.4%
Dropzone AI10.6%
Prophet Security9.3%
Other77.7%
AI-SOC
 

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.
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.
Use StrikeReady?
Leave a review
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%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
No data available
 

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 Business23
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise53
No data available
 

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...
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Phantom
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Recorded Future, Blackstone
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR). Updated: August 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.