Cyware vs Torq

Cyware is a low-code automation product, Orchestrate, sold beside a threat intelligence platform. Torq is an AI SOC platform with hyperautomation, case management and agent products. They split on what a reviewer can read after an action, where the rubric reads Cyware as partial and Torq as documented on the pages read on 2026-11-03.

6.11to5.74Totals on the published rubric: Cyware 2nd, Torq 7th of 14. They share a band, 0.37 apart, so the evidence does not order them.

0.37points apart

The difference that decides it

On what a reviewer can read after an action, Cyware states complete audit trails for playbook changes without describing record contents, while Torq says every verdict, decision, exception and override is captured with context, though the page states this for triage. torq.io, read 2026-11-03

8criteria

Rubric side by side

Each criterion is scored 0 to 10 from the vendor's own pages; points are weight times score divided by 100.
Criterion	Weight	Cyware	Torq	Gap, first minus second
Native containment coverage (17 and 13 of 25 actions)	25	7.1	5.9	+1.2
Published time-to-contain evidence with method	15	4.0	4.0	level
Approval, rollback and blast-radius controls documented	15	6.5	6.5	level
Explanation and audit trail	15	6.0	8.0	-2.0
Integration depth documented	10	8.0	7.0	+1.0
Detection-to-response coupling	8	6.5	5.0	+1.5
Pricing transparency	6	3.0	3.0	level
Deployment and data handling	6	6.0	3.5	+2.5
Total	100	6.11	5.74	0.37

Full reasons and sources for every score are on the profiles of Cyware and Torq.

6.5 : 6.5approval score each

Approval and rollback controls

Cyware. Page states approvals through a mobile app for "critical automation decisions" and rollback of workflows to previous versions; action rollback and scope limits are not stated. cyware.com, read 2026-11-03

Torq. Page says response runs fully autonomously or with human-on-the-loop oversight and cites a manual override; no tiers, rollback or scope limit. torq.io, read 2026-11-03

17 : 13actions of 25

Containment coverage by domain

Domain	Cyware	Torq
EDR	5 of 6	4 of 6
Identity	5 of 5	4 of 5
Email	3 of 5	1 of 5
Cloud	1 of 5	3 of 5
Network	3 of 4	1 of 4
All five	17 of 25	13 of 25

Published time to contain: Cyware, no published figure; Torq, no published figure.

4buyer types

Verdict by buyer type

regulated financial: Torq has the stronger published case on approval and audit: it documents audit logs and human-on-the-loop oversight, with no tiers or rollback. Cyware documents mobile approvals and playbook audit trails, with no action rollback.
lean team: Cyware is easier to size up before a call: it scopes cost per engagement and publishes no price. Torq publishes no price and states no deployment options.
MSSP: Only Torq states anything for MSSPs: it cites RSM, a global MSSP, automating 82 percent of its cases (customer claim). Cyware states no MSSP terms on the pages read.
Microsoft estate: Only Cyware says anything specific: it has a Microsoft partnership, announced 2025-10-22, under which Sentinel ingests Cyware threat intelligence. Torq states no Microsoft-specific detail on the pages read.

When to pick each

Pick Cyware when deployment location and data handling are fixed by policy, because it describes hybrid deployment through lightweight agents and shows a SOC 2 Type 2 logo, without residency or retention.

Pick Torq when the record a reviewer reads after an action decides the purchase, because it says every verdict, decision, exception and override is captured with context, though the page states this for triage.

Read dates are on each source link. See also Cyware alternatives and Torq alternatives, or the buyer-type rankings.