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

Fortinet FortiSOAR vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator comparison

Why PeerSpot?
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
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
Fortinet FortiSOAR
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (8th)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (15th)
 

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

"Torq has definitely changed the day-to-day experience for our security analysts, as they feel more excited and feel that Torq interface and workflow allow them to build things themselves."
"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."
"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."
"Since we started working with Torq, I am handling much fewer alerts, it is becoming really easy for me to handle an alert, I have all the information that I need, I do not need to connect to different vendors to receive this information, and the main thing I got from Torq is time, which now helps me to build another automated system and learn."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"With Torq, I automate actions while achieving SLA compliance and streamline alert investigation processes much better."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"It has a quick detection and response time."
"My final rating for Fortinet FortiSOAR would be 10 out of 10, where one is bad and ten is good."
"The product is expensive, but it is a value-for-money product, a good product to invest in, eventually securing your environment and helping to protect against untoward security incidents."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiSOAR is the number of available connectors and the simplicity to start to automate."
"The playbook and the dashboard of FortiSOAR are really informative."
"The product can be automated for network security purposes. The solution offers a great security automation response."
"The solution automates everything using the playbooks and pre-deployed response mitigation scenarios."
"The most valuable feature is its centralization as you don't want to be going to different locations to correlate items or to piece anything together to derive meaningful insights."
"The security is a key feature and the console is very user friendly."
"I really like the auditing component because it really looks at exactly what has happened on the network."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator's performance is good."
"I like the solution's feasibility. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is also better and easier to use than other ePOs."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the antivirus and the DLP."
"We get fewer false positives than with other solutions."
"The automation alert for the ticketing tool is one of the vital features"
"The most valuable feature of the McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is agent communication."
 

Cons

"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."
"There are some issues and bugs that I think need to be fixed, but they are currently not focused on it."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"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."
"What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it still provides faster response and saves time."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"The licensing model could be better."
"I don't currently see where the solution is lacking features. For us and for our clients it works very well and we're pleased with it."
"The solution doesn't connect well with the network devices."
"FortiSOAR needs to improve the response time for executing playbooks."
"The technology and integrations are important so should continue to be enhanced."
"Technical support could be improved."
"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."
"The tool's user interface is an area of concern where improvements are needed."
"While there are bugs and a few functionality issues, it is just a matter of raising them with the support team. However, support is part of the problem as well. You want everything to be seamless in a perfect world, but the support is spread across different countries. They have Level 1, 2, and 3. Level 1 is most likely in a developing country. They don't provide the best service."
"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."
"Although it has the ability to auto create service tickets, it needs to expand to allow more products this ability."
"The technical support from McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator was very good with technically efficient professionals previously. However, recently I have noticed that support staff are primarily L1, and even when escalating to L2 or L3, we do not see the same level of expertise in people resolving issues."
"The way that ePolicy launches the updates is very slow. It would be great if that was faster."
"They have to do something to make the solution more resilient or recoverable from power failure events, which may include creating their own database."
"There is a problem when it comes to agent communication and duplicate records, where the rebooting of a machine leads to the installation of a new agent and you get a lot of duplicate records that ultimately affect your compliance monitoring."
"A lot of the components of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, such as Sandboxing, DX, and ATP are not stable."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Since Africa is struggling with foreign exchange, the solution is pretty expensive there."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is expensive."
"The solution offers both licensing and subscription models that are similar in price to other products."
"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."
"Considering all the features of Fortinet FortiSOAR, I think it has a good price."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is an expensive solution."
"Pricing is fine compared to other solutions."
"If you compare Fortinet FortiSOAR's price with the prices of the market leader, Palo Alto, then it can be considered a cheaper product."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 not an expensive solution."
"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.
916,956 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Computer Software Company
6%
Outsourcing Company
15%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise13
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?
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 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: September 2026.
916,956 professionals have used our research since 2012.