We performed a comparison between Swimlane and ThreatQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks, Splunk and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)."The most valuable feature is the onboarding of the workloads. You can see all that has been onboarded in your account on the dashboards."
"It is easy to implement (turn on) - does need a skilled analyst to develop queries and playbooks."
"I like the ability to run custom KQL queries. I don't know if that feature is specific to Sentinel. As far as I know, they are using technology built into Azure's Log Analytics app. Sentinel integrates with that, and we use this functionality heavily."
"The data connectors that Microsoft Sentinel provides are easy to integrate when we work with a Microsoft agent."
"The most valuable feature is the UEBA. It's very easy for a security operations analyst. It has a one-touch analysis where you can search for a particular entity, and you can get a complete overview of that entity or user."
"It is always correlating to IOCs for normal attacks, using Azure-related resources. For example, if any illegitimate IP starts unusual activity on our Azure firewall, then it automatically generates an alarm for us."
"What is most useful, is that it has a good connection to the Microsoft ecosystem, and I think that's the key part."
"We are able to deploy within half an hour and we only require one person to complete the implementation."
"It provides us with a single portal for our logs from different solutions."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the support."
"The technical support from Swimlane is very good."
"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."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
"Multi-tenancy, in my opinion, needs to be improved. I believe it can do better as a managed service provider."
"The interface could be more user-friendly. It''s a small improvement that they could make if they wanted to."
"I can't think of anything other than just getting the name out there. I think a lot of customers don't fully understand the full capabilities of Azure Sentinel yet. It is kind of like when they're first starting to use Azure, it might not be something they first think about. So, they should just kind of get to the point where it is more widely used."
"Everyone has their favorites. There is always room for improvement, and everybody will say, "I wish you could do this for me or that for me." It is a personal thing based on how you use the tool. I do not necessarily have those thoughts, and they are probably not really valuable because they are unique to the context of the user, but broadly, where it can continue to improve is by adding more connectors to more systems."
"I would like Sentinel to have more out-of-the-box analytics rules. There are already more than 400 rules, but they could add more industry-specific ones. For example, you could have sets of out-of-the-box rules for banking, financial sector, insurance, automotive, etc., so it's easier for people to use it out of the box. Structuring the rules according to industry might help us."
"Sentinel could improve its ticketing and management. A few customers I have worked with liked to take the data created in Sentinel. You can make some basic efforts around that, but the customers wanted to push it to a third-party system so they could set up a proper ticketing management system, like ServiceNow, Jira, etc."
"They can work on the EDR side of things... Every time we need to onboard these kinds of machines into the EDR, we need to do it with the help of Intune, to sync up the devices, and do the configuration. I'm looking for something on the EDR side that will reduce this kind of work."
"If we want to use more features, we have to pay more. There are multiple solutions on the cloud itself, but the pricing model package isn't consistent, which is confusing to clients."
"The stability of the solution has room for improvement."
"We faced a lot of issues with the product’s stability."
"The initial setup and deployment are complex."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
Swimlane is ranked 17th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 3 reviews while ThreatQ is ranked 25th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 2 reviews. Swimlane is rated 7.6, while ThreatQ is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Swimlane writes "Great support, scalable, and easier to code". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatQ writes "Improves the threat intelligence gathering process, but it is not user-friendly". Swimlane is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, Splunk SOAR, Tines, Fortinet FortiSOAR and Siemplify, whereas ThreatQ is most compared with ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP), Anomali ThreatStream, Recorded Future, Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and CrowdStrike Falcon.
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.
