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

Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs Recorded Future comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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

Group-IB Threat Intelligence
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
17th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Recorded Future
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Digital Risk Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) category, the mindshare of Group-IB Threat Intelligence is 2.5%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Recorded Future is 6.0%, down from 15.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Recorded Future6.0%
Group-IB Threat Intelligence2.5%
Other91.5%
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
 

Featured Reviews

Abdelrahman Hussein - PeerSpot reviewer
CTI & Threat Hunter at Telecom Egypt
Easy to setup, highly stable and scalable and efficiently tracks threat actors and analyze their tactics
We use Group-IB Threat Intelligence to help us with threat hunting, incident response, and vulnerability management We have found the site intelligence features to be the most valuable. We are able to use these features to track threat actors and analyze their tactics, techniques, and procedures…
Viral Shaa - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Security Analyst at Eos Energy Enterprises, Inc.
Intelligence-led security has transformed alert triage and now prioritizes energy sector threats
For the threat landscape, Recorded Future has a nice dashboard and reporting feature, though there is always an opportunity to improve how we visualize the high-severity sectors. It requires tuning to avoid alert fatigue, especially in high-threat environments like energy, where many threats seem relevant. Some advanced intelligence features require additional licensing, which can significantly increase costs. While Recorded Future provides strong IT-focused intelligence, OT and ICS-specific intelligence, which is improving, still requires supplemental sources for full coverage. New users or analysts newly onboarded to the team may need additional training to navigate the platform effectively. If we were to upgrade to a Tier 1 plan or an additional licensing plan, it should include advanced intelligence feeds that require licensing upgrades to unlock those features. Although Recorded Future is best in breed in the market, the company should consider lowering prices to be more accessible for mid-sized organizations where budgeting is a main concern.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have found the site intelligence features to be the most valuable."
"The cost of the solution versus the cost of an incident that may have been prevented with it shows a very high ROI."
"Threat Intelligence's best feature is threat activation."
"Threat Intelligence is very stable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the sandbox."
"The most valuable Group-IB Threat Intelligence features are their detections, especially in terms of account and card information leakage. This data sets Group-IB apart from some of the competition."
"The totality of the recordings is quite important. The networks, the new threat actors, the new methods, tactics, techniques, and procedures."
"The tool can integrate with a lot of security control and proactive protection devices."
"The tool is helpful in vulnerability assessment of zero-day vulnerabilities and phishing domains. The solution provides information on any domains of the organization that has undergone phishing or any other cyberattacks."
"The solution is diverse and provides me with a lot of different mechanisms for evaluation."
"After implementing Recorded Future, I can point out two positive impacts: first, the tool helps our SOC team save 30 to 40 percent of effort due to the reduction of manual threat detection and false positives, and second, the quality of our threat hunting has improved considerably, leading to a better understanding of the threat landscape."
"The most valuable feature is Recorded Future's protection of exposed customer data on the hardware side."
"Recorded Future has some important strengths. It has a long history of success in the market and is known for excellent threat intelligence. Its team is skilled at using AI to search for and report on threats. For many years, it was seen as the best in the industry."
"Recorded Future has positively impacted my organization by allowing our analysts to work less on doing IOC enrichments."
"The features and capabilities of Recorded Future that I have found the most valuable are its AI-driven capabilities that make a significant impact."
 

Cons

"Group-IB Threat Intelligence should improve integration for SIEM and SOAR solutions."
"As the landscape evolves, they could provide a little more detail or specificity to map it to the MITRE ATT&CK framework."
"Threat Intelligence's OT security could be improved."
"The lack of appliance-based or on-premise options for this solution is its biggest downfall. Clients request them often."
"The web intelligence could be improved. It is not as good as the intelligence from other solutions."
"The tool should improve its third-party supply chain risks because there is a lack of visibility."
"At present, my clients need to be trained by me or another organization on how to use Recorded Future and how to get the best out of it as an analyst, engineer, and administrator. It would be better if clients could directly learn these things without having to go through me or other organizations."
"The solution would benefit from introducing automation."
"While I don't think the tool is weak, its position isn't as dominant as it once was. Other companies like CrowdStrike and Mandiant are now challenging them in many areas. One downside is that Recorded Future can be complex for customers to use and understand. This isn't easy for clients to navigate."
"The tool can be pricey, especially for smaller companies."
"The price of Recorded Future is a bit high, especially for smaller teams working on a tight budget, but it is very effective and relatively competitive for large organizations."
"The documentation and support resources provided by Recorded Future are bad."
"The solution could improve in reducing the false positives. However, most of the other tools on the market have false positives. If they enhance their data algorithm, it could improve the accuracy of results and minimize false positives. Identifying patterns of false possibilities can aid in developing better reporting features that could potentially eliminate them in the future. This recording feature tool could benefit from adopting similar techniques utilized by other tools to enhance its functionality. By doing so, it could minimize the need for manual efforts in distinguishing true positives from false positives, ultimately reducing the workload."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Threat Intelligence is costly, but it gives value for money."
"Group-IB Threat Intelligence's pricing is reasonable."
"The pricing is alright. It's right on the mark."
"The biggest disadvantage of Recorded Future is the cost here in Eastern Europe. The solution is correctly priced for big companies who have the money to invest in such solutions. Also, the solution is useless on its own, which means that you have to invest in other solutions with which Recorded Future can be integrated. At present, Recorded Future can cost 60,000 euros per year. I am able to offer my clients a 5% to 10% discount, but in this region, the cost is still prohibitive even with the discount. If Recorded Future were more flexible in terms of price, there would be better sales opportunities in Europe and Eastern Europe, in particular, because we have more small- and medium-sized companies here."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing a seven out of ten."
"There appear to be up to five different levels, with the most expensive version costing around $95,000 to $105,000 a year for subscription services."
"The price of the solution is worth it. The overall performance of the solution outweighs the cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) solutions are best for your needs.
916,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise14
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Recorded Future?
The price of Recorded Future is a bit high, especially for smaller teams working on a tight budget, but it is very effective and relatively competitive for large organizations.
What needs improvement with Recorded Future?
Recorded Future can be improved in terms of their APIs and their integration. Mainly their integration is very difficult, especially with their dark web monitoring notifications and brand protectio...
What is your primary use case for Recorded Future?
My main use case for Recorded Future is IOC enrichment, dark web monitoring, brand protection, and sandboxing for malware. For investment monitoring, privacy protection, or sandboxing in my day-to-...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Fujitsu, Regions, SITA, St. Jude Medical, Accenture, T-Mobile, TIAA, Intel Security, Armor, Alert Logic, NTT, Splunk
Find out what your peers are saying about Group-IB Threat Intelligence vs. Recorded Future and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
916,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.