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

Splunk SOAR vs Swimlane comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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

Torq
Sponsored
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (2nd), AI-Powered Security Automation (2nd)
Splunk SOAR
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Swimlane
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
AI-Powered Security Automation (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.8%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Splunk SOAR is 7.1%, down from 7.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Swimlane is 2.8%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Splunk SOAR7.1%
Torq3.8%
Swimlane2.8%
Other86.3%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at Swimlane
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.
SS
Manager cybersecurity at Hexion Inc.
Automates threat response and reduces investigation time but needs better threat intelligence integration
One thing that we would like to see with Splunk SOAR is the expandability to the threat intelligence feed. Currently, we have limited ingestion to the threat intelligence feed for the correlation purpose. We would like to see it being integrated, with license cost or without license cost, to leading threat intelligence sources such as Recorded Future, Feedly, or Flare. That is something we would appreciate having integrated. The second thing on the improvement side is about exposed credential-related information. If we start ingesting those data to Splunk SOAR or SIEM with some sort of integration with threat intelligence feed, that will also improve our detection and prediction method or help us with the investigation.
MD
Software Engineer III at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Task persistence and integration ease have been key benefits
The best part of Swimlane is the persistent notifications and its ease of integration, requiring minimal coding. While it lacks response features, it can be integrated with messaging or queue services to achieve this. Any incident response requires additional integration since Swimlane itself doesn't react to incidents. Real-time data in terms of persistence is configurable, and without config, tasks persist indefinitely until completion. If using Appian versions below 11, integration features for Swimlane aren't available. By default, Swimlane lacks built-in intelligence, needing coding for integration. Although the Swimlane is beneficial and reduces manpower requirements, it's hindered by its lack of exposure. If exposed through services or endpoints, its functionality could be accessed without needing a local standalone application. On a scale of one to ten, this solution deserves a rating of nine.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"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."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"So far, the interface is very easy to use."
"Surprisingly, the mobile app is valuable because it is very convenient for our on-call analysts to respond and get alerted to security alerts and events wherever they are. We are able to harness the power of Splunk SOAR and everything that we are doing, and we are also able to alert our on-call analysts 24/7. From their mobile phone, they can respond to those alerts."
"Workflow management is most valuable. It is easily customizable"
"In terms of deployment, there were no issues. It was pretty seamless."
"The product’s integration with other Splunk products is valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Splunk SOAR that stands out is it has a great SOAR. The automation and orchestration module is highly mature. A lot of use cases are on user entity and behavioral analytics (UEBA), which is artificial intelligence and machine learning-based (AIML)."
"Splunk SOAR has saved us a lot; monthly, around 300 hours of effort, it is saving with Splunk SOAR, and it has helped us where we were able to run the SOC operation with the less number of headcount versus what we used to do earlier."
"Splunk SOAR's quick response to incidents is the most valuable part."
"The biggest advantage of Swimlane for us is that it saves time, which in turn helps us in cost-saving."
"The technical support from Swimlane is very good."
"On a scale of one to ten, this solution deserves a rating of nine."
"Swimlane enables two SOC analysts to work efficiently as much as ten analysts would without Swimlane, which translates to significant manpower savings."
"It provides us with a single portal for our logs from different solutions."
"This is the best SOAR product available on the market right now and I recommend it."
"Our primary goal was to reduce analyst time, and we have been successful in that."
"We are using it for a SOAR platform at a Cyber Security company which is MSSP."
 

Cons

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"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."
"Additionally, the documentation for Torq is not very clear. Most of the information is presented in videos, which are not ideal for reading; there are mostly paragraphs and other text-based content."
"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."
"We have playbooks written to extract these events and put them into the workflow since it wasn't structured as expected. It was a miss for us. We couldn't figure out why it broke or what actually happened there. It was something in this feed with legitimate and security events, so we tried to understand the names and what we would call them."
"Sometimes it lags when I am working on multiple things."
"Splunk SOAR should improve its ease of upgrade, which is a pain point for us right now."
"One thing that we would like to see with Splunk SOAR is the expandability to the threat intelligence feed."
"Real-time monitoring of alerts and incidents, centralized dashboards, case management, and correlation of data from SIEM, firewalls, EDR, and cloud tools could be improved."
"They can improve on what they are currently doing. They can provide more playbooks or at least template playbooks that are in their repository."
"The scalability could be better."
"Various aspects of the playbook development process itself can be optimized."
"The stability of the solution has room for improvement."
"I would like to see improvements in the minor bugs that occur with each update, as some features might have issues."
"The initial setup and deployment are complex."
"We faced a lot of issues with the product’s stability."
"There is a need for enhanced version control in Swimlane. Currently, our version does not support it, making it tough to move changes between environments during significant updates."
"Swimlane is not scalable because it is not exposed. Currently, it's a manual component that requires configuration through coding."
"The initial setup and deployment are complex."
"One of the disadvantages of Swimlane is that to manage the platform, we need hardcore developers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"When we first purchased our Splunk SOAR license, it was based on an event-count model. It was based on the number of events. I had strong opinions at the time that automation should not be stifled by the amount of automation you can accomplish, so the previous structure was not as beneficial for us. Later that year, we got told or saw at a conference that they announced user-based pricing. We are now in a renewal period, so we migrated to a user-based license model, which is more appropriate for us so that we no longer have to worry about stifling our automation based on the quantity."
"The tool is not cheap."
"I found the price of Splunk SOAR to be good."
"It's very overpriced because it is based on the number of users. There is no bulk licensing."
"We renewed it this year. This year was the first time there was a dramatic increase in the price. It was kind of non-negotiable. It was just a high increase. We had internal communications, and it was definitely a surprise to us. In a short time frame, we renewed it this year. Prices are going up everywhere, but they are not always justifiable, at least not to our eyes. The pricing this year was definitely a big shock."
"The cost is high and the licensing is on an annual basis."
"While I can't confirm the exact pricing, some colleagues have mentioned that Splunk SOAR may be on the costlier side."
"The licensing cost is reasonable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
896,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise39
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
To improve alert handling capability, there are ready-to-use playbooks available, but there are very few. Torq should...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
Torq is primarily used for security operations, mainly for the SOC team. I develop use cases based on requirements fr...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
The maintenance side is very good because we are using the product to reduce activities. For instance, sometimes ther...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Splunk Phantom?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is perfectly acceptable, helping us significantly wi...
What needs improvement with Splunk Phantom?
From the improvement point of view regarding Splunk SOAR, I suggest including more types of LLM models such as autono...
What is your primary use case for Splunk Phantom?
The use cases that I work with mostly in Splunk SOAR include phishing email responses automation, where Splunk detect...
What needs improvement with Swimlane?
One of the disadvantages of Swimlane is that to manage the platform, we need hardcore developers. We have recently se...
What is your primary use case for Swimlane?
We are using Swimlane for automation purposes and security orchestration. We are using Swimlane's Playbook Automation...
What advice do you have for others considering Swimlane?
I would rate Swimlane a seven out of ten as a product.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Phantom
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Recorded Future, Blackstone
LinkedIn, TransUnion, Citrix, Aetna, Perspecta
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk SOAR vs. Swimlane and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.