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

Fortinet FortiSOAR 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
15
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Fortinet FortiSOAR
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.8%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiSOAR is 3.7%, down from 4.4% 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 (%)
Torq3.8%
Fortinet FortiSOAR3.7%
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator1.7%
Other90.8%
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.
VIJAICYRIAC - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at Movate
Automated playbooks have reduced response times and provided deeper threat analytics
The effectiveness of Fortinet FortiSOAR playbooks is that they minimize the mean time to response and MTTR, and I think more automation is required to improve the response time. I am working with the Dynamic Case Management feature, and it is dynamic. The Dynamic Case Management feature is more helpful for us to get real-time anomalies and identify the threats. It also assists in real-time response, so it is helpful.
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."
"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."
"Torq has exceeded expectations by delivering workflows in a timely and lower effort manner than XSOAR, and it meets all my needs while saving a ton of time and targeting $600,000 saved this year, which is a substantial amount of money."
"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."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"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."
"With Torq, I automate actions while achieving SLA compliance and streamline alert investigation processes much better."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"The solution has many connectors, which is quite helpful."
"We use the product for security."
"The solution automates everything using the playbooks and pre-deployed response mitigation scenarios."
"The most valuable features are the playbooks that allow you to take action immediately after the approval of the analytics and anomalies."
"It is a scalable solution...The implementation phase of the product was not tough or difficult."
"The solution is easy to implement and includes 450 built-in connectors."
"The brand value that Fortinet has, it has the reputation of being a reasonably priced product, and they have an enormous customer base in India."
"My final rating for Fortinet FortiSOAR would be 10 out of 10, where one is bad and ten is good."
"The central manager policy is valuable, meaning we have almost all client modules in one solution, which is great."
"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."
"McAfee's advantage is that there are fewer false positives compared to some of these other vendors, so I'd say they're doing well."
"The solution provides excellent advanced analytics capabilities and the integration capabilities make it straightforward to integrate McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator with IT workflow systems."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator's performance is good."
"I really like the DLP feature because it gives IT clarity, it doesn't have database issues, and it hasn't crashed or given us problems in the two years we've been using it."
"Many organizations will find the solution has many features that would suit their needs and reduce the number of issues they face."
"It is protecting us from USB-based hazards like viruses."
 

Cons

"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 probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially, and creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"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."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"Fortinet is good, however, as they get into security analytics, while their support is okay, sometimes it requires some hand-holding and their response is probably not as good as Palo Alto."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR has to be updated on the recent threats. Threats are changing, and it has to be updated to meet the AI-based threats that are out there."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR should add more documentation for some use cases."
"We need more fine-tuning for ChatGPT, especially when creating connectors."
"The technology and integrations are important so should continue to be enhanced."
"FortiSOAR needs to improve the response time for executing playbooks."
"The ease of playbook creation on FortiSOAR needs improvement."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the impact of the agent on the endpoint's performance - the resources it takes."
"There should be more insights and completeness into the cyber kill chain, similar to CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. It just seems a little outdated in being 100% signature-based without all of the insights and protections that come with CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. Overall, they've got some catching up to do if they plan to compete in the comprehensive EDR space."
"We need to consolidate multiple features into one console. It would be beneficial to have all the important features on a single platform."
"Some drawbacks include difficulty in supporting improvements because we don't get proper response from Trellix support, so there is a need to improve the support."
"They have to do something to make the solution more resilient or recoverable from power failure events, which may include creating their own database."
"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."
"One thing that I don't like is that McAfee products change very often and upgrade very often."
"The detection aspect should be improved so that signatures are updated more quickly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Since Africa is struggling with foreign exchange, the solution is pretty expensive there."
"The price of the product should be lower. The brand value that Fortinet has, it has the reputation of being a reasonably priced product, and they have an enormous customer base in India. Most of the SME market is covered by FortiGate firewalls. It becomes an easy way for consultants, such as us, or even system integrators, to open the door with the Fortinet product lines."
"Pricing is fine compared to other solutions."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is an expensive solution."
"The solution offers both licensing and subscription models that are similar in price to other products."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is expensive."
"If you compare Fortinet FortiSOAR's price with the prices of the market leader, Palo Alto, then it can be considered a cheaper product."
"Considering all the features of Fortinet FortiSOAR, I think it has a good price."
"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."
"It's 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."
"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."
"$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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
903,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
I do not dislike anything about Torq because it has satisfied all of our use cases and requirements. We contacted sup...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
Initially, we were using Slack for small automations, such as creating pipelines or shutting down servers. For exampl...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I have been working for five years with experience in the IT field. Torq is very good. It manages everything. I would...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortinet FortiSOAR?
The product is expensive, but it is a value-for-money product. It is a good product to invest in, eventually securing...
What needs improvement with Fortinet FortiSOAR?
Fortinet FortiSOAR has to be updated on the recent threats. Threats are changing, and it has to be updated to meet th...
What is your primary use case for Fortinet FortiSOAR?
I have been working in my field for almost four years, but right now I am not using it because my current company is ...
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
CyberSponse, FortiSOAR
McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
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
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet FortiSOAR vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
903,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.