We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiSOAR and ThreatQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We didn't have anything similar. So, it really provides value from the incidents and automation point of view. The overview of the security fabric is most valuable."
"Sentinel uses Azure Logic Apps for automation, which is really powerful. This allows us to easily automate responses to incidents."
"What is most useful, is that it has a good connection to the Microsoft ecosystem, and I think that's the key part."
"Having your logs put all in one place with machine learning working on those logs is a good feature. I don't need to start thinking, "Where are my logs?" My logs are in a centralized repository, like Log Analytics, which is why you can't use Sentinel without Log Analytics. Having all those logs in one place is an advantage."
"The automation rules and playbooks are the most useful that I've seen. A number of other places segregate the automation and playbook as separate tools, whereas Microsoft is a SIEM and SOAR tool in one."
"It is easy to implement (turn on) - does need a skilled analyst to develop queries and playbooks."
"The features that stand out are the detection engine and its integration with multiple data sources."
"The SOAR playbooks are Sentinel's most valuable feature. It gives you a unified toolset for detecting, investigating, and responding to incidents. That's what clearly differentiates Sentinels from its competitors. It's cloud-native, offering end-to-end coverage with more than 120 connectors. All types of data logs can be poured into the system so analysis can happen. That end-to-end visibility gives it the advantage."
"The product can be automated for network security purposes. The solution offers a great security automation response."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is a very interactive and user-friendly solution."
"It's great that the solution is integrated with FortiAnalyzer."
"We use the product for security."
"The solution is easy to implement and includes 450 built-in connectors."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It is a scalable solution...The implementation phase of the product was not tough or difficult."
"The good news is that FortiSOAR is not hard to maintain. If you prepared well and deployed strong initially, then maintenance will take half an hour every other week, not more than that. A single person can do it."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
"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."
"We do have in-built or out-of-the-box metrics that are shown on the dashboard, but it doesn't give the kind of metrics that we need from our environment whereby we need to check the meantime to detect and meantime to resolve an incident. I have to do it manually. I have to pull all the logs or all the alerts that are fed into Sentinel over a certain period. We do this on a monthly basis, so I go into Microsoft Sentinel and pull all the alerts or incidents we closed over a period of thirty days."
"Sentinel should be improved with more connectors. At the moment, it only covers a few vendors. If I remember correctly, only 100 products are supported natively in Sentinel, although you can connect them with syslog. But Microsoft should increase the number of native connectors to get logs into Sentinel."
"Sentinel still has some anomalies. For example, sometimes when we write a query for log analysis with KQL, it doesn't give us the data in a proper way... Also, the fields or columns could be improved. Sometimes, it is not giving the desired results and there is a blank field."
"We'd like to see more connectors."
"They only classify alerts into three categories: high, medium, and low. So, from the user's point of view, having another critical category would be awesome."
"It would be good to have some connectors for third-party SIEM solutions. Many customers are struggling with the integration of Azure Sentinel with their on-premise SIEM. Microsoft is changing the log structure many times a year, which can corrupt a custom integration. It would be good to have some connectors developed by Microsoft or supply vendors, but they are not providing such functionality or tools."
"If Sentinel had a graphical user interface, it would be easier to use. I would also like it to be more customizable."
"The solution could improve the playbooks."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR's dashboard is not easy to understand."
"I have found that Fortinet FortiSOAR needs a lot of improvement. The Orchestration needs to be improved."
"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 UI design of the solution needs to be changed since it can get difficult for a newbie to operate."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"The area that needs improvement is integration with multiple third-party vendors."
"Technical support could be improved."
"The technology and integrations are important so should continue to be enhanced."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
Fortinet FortiSOAR is ranked 10th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 12 reviews while ThreatQ is ranked 24th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 2 reviews. Fortinet FortiSOAR is rated 7.4, while ThreatQ is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSOAR writes "A stable solution that has a number of available connectors and is simple to automate". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatQ writes "Improves the threat intelligence gathering process, but it is not user-friendly". Fortinet FortiSOAR is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, Splunk SOAR, Swimlane, ServiceNow Security Operations and Cisco SecureX, whereas ThreatQ is most compared with ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP), Anomali ThreatStream, Recorded Future and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR. See our Fortinet FortiSOAR vs. ThreatQ report.
See our list of best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) vendors.
We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.