Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

CrowdStrike Falcon vs ThreatQ comparison

 

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

CrowdStrike Falcon
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
126
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (6th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (2nd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (1st), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (1st), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (1st), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (3rd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (2nd)
ThreatQ
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
16th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms category, the mindshare of CrowdStrike Falcon is 9.4%, down from 12.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatQ is 3.0%, up from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Chintan-Vyas - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to set up with good behavior-based analysis but needs a single-click recovery option
Most organizations are currently looking for a scheduled scan to meet their compliance needs. Other players like Symantec and Trend Micro, FireEye, et cetera, are still providing the signature-based regular scheduled scans also, which is not available in CrowdStrike. That is one parameter that we feel should be there in CrowdStrike. CrowdStrike is only working on the dynamic or the files under execution. CrowdStrike is not scanning the static files. The product could be more accurate in terms of performance. We'd like to have a single-click recovery option. With some machines getting corrupted by malware, we need an easy way to start with a blank slate if things happen. That one feature should be there in the EDR.
reviewer2384535 - PeerSpot reviewer
Improves the threat intelligence gathering process, but it is not user-friendly
The tool is not user-friendly. It is not beginner-friendly. It would be very difficult for a beginner to learn the tool. It will take at least two months to get familiar with it. Building the playbook is a little difficult for a beginner. The vendor must simplify the tool and make it user-friendly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The EDR is amazing and ease of integration with Splunk is a big plus. Integration with BigQuery is also a plus for me and workflow creation is easy. Overall, CrowdStrike Falcon is a great product."
"The feature that I find to be the most valuable, is being able to look at the system analysis and being able to baseline what is installed on the system."
"The solution has improved my organization by automating the detection and reporting of unwanted applications so we're aware of them and can respond appropriately."
"It has good features for threat detection."
"CrowdStrike Falcon's most valuable feature is the fact that it's not getting in the way of our workforce and their workflow."
"CrowdStrike Falcon's scalability is good. We have thousands of students using this solution."
"The best benefit of CrowdStrike Falcon is 99% MITRE coverage."
"The managed services are distinguished, responsive, dynamic, flexible, and assertive when taking action."
"The reporting services are great. With reporting services, if you have customers that just visit a URL you can see the result - including why it's blocked and how and how the URL was first recognized as malicious."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
 

Cons

"Tighter integration around XDR could be included."
"I would like to see a more accurate integration and an option to check the local machine."
"This solution is relatively expensive."
"Deployment in cloud environments is challenging. Another concern is CrowdStrike's GUI. It changes annually, making it hard to work and find options."
"The malware analysis could be improved, as that's what we use the solution for the most and that change would make it a better EDR tool."
"This solution could be improved with greater scope for admins to make changes to the solution."
"In a future release, I would like to see more integrations for data breaches and security features."
"The tool is more expensive than other products in the market."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I am not aware of the price, but I believe that it is among the most expensive XDRs out there. Of course, this is dependent on the features you choose. Depending on the features, the price might increase."
"The pricing is definitely high but you get what you pay for, and it's not so high that it prices itself out of the market."
"CrowdStrike Falcon is more expensive than other EDR solutions with similar features."
"The pricing is not bad. It's on the higher end of the market, but you get what you pay for."
"The pricing could be reduced. If it was more reasonable that would be great."
"There are three to four licensing models available to choose from for CrowdStrike Falcon. The price of CrowdStrike Falcon depends on the distributor and the reseller partner. The price we received was good."
"CrowdStrike is a reasonably priced tool."
"CrowdStrike is well priced. On a yearly basis, it costs between $60 and $100 per user."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Educational Organization
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions that are very scalable, secure, and user-friendly. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto offers ...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with Darktrace?
Both of these products perform similarly and have many outstanding attributes. CrowdStrike Falcon offers an amazing user interface that makes setup easy and seamless. CrowdStrike Falcon offers a cl...
How does Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compare with Crowdstrike Falcon?
The CrowdStrike solution delivers a lot of information about incidents. It has a very light sensor that will never push your machine hardware to "test", you don't have the usual "scan now" feature ...
What do you like most about ThreatQ?
Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy.
What needs improvement with ThreatQ?
The tool is not user-friendly. It is not beginner-friendly. It would be very difficult for a beginner to learn the tool. It will take at least two months to get familiar with it. Building the playb...
What is your primary use case for ThreatQ?
We used the solution for threat mapping and managing IoCs.
 

Also Known As

CrowdStrike Falcon, CrowdStrike Falcon XDR, CrowdStrike Falcon Threat Intelligence, CrowdStrike Identity Protection, CrowdStrike Falcon Surface
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike Falcon vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.