Tines vs Torq

Tines is a no-code workflow platform with a Cases add-on and an AI SOC page. 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 Tines as partial and Torq as documented on the pages read on 2026-11-03.

5.62to5.74Totals on the published rubric: Tines 8th, Torq 7th of 14. They share a band, 0.13 apart, so the evidence does not order them.

0.13points apart

The difference that decides it

On what a reviewer can read after an action, Torq says every verdict, decision, exception and override is captured with context, though the page states this for triage; Tines describes Cases for case and incident management and states no audit log or per-action record. 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	Tines	Torq	Gap, first minus second
Native containment coverage (22 and 13 of 25 actions)	25	8.6	5.9	+2.7
Published time-to-contain evidence with method	15	3.0	4.0	-1.0
Approval, rollback and blast-radius controls documented	15	3.5	6.5	-3.0
Explanation and audit trail	15	5.0	8.0	-3.0
Integration depth documented	10	6.5	7.0	-0.5
Detection-to-response coupling	8	6.5	5.0	+1.5
Pricing transparency	6	5.5	3.0	+2.5
Deployment and data handling	6	4.0	3.5	+0.5
Total	100	5.62	5.74	0.13

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

3.5 : 6.5approval score each

Approval and rollback controls

Tines. The product page says Agents enable "autonomous workflow activity and user interaction" but states no approval step, rollback or scope limit. tines.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

22 : 13actions of 25

Containment coverage by domain

Domain	Tines	Torq
EDR	6 of 6	4 of 6
Identity	5 of 5	4 of 5
Email	4 of 5	1 of 5
Cloud	4 of 5	3 of 5
Network	3 of 4	1 of 4
All five	22 of 25	13 of 25

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

5buyer 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. Tines states neither an approval step nor an audit log on the pages read.
lean team: Tines is easier to size up before a call: it publishes a free edition with 3 live workflows. 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). Tines states no MSSP terms on the pages read.
Microsoft estate: Only Tines says anything specific: it lists Microsoft and Microsoft Teams in its story library. Torq states no Microsoft-specific detail on the pages read.
CrowdStrike estate: Only Tines says anything specific: it lists CrowdStrike in its story library. Torq states no CrowdStrike-specific detail on the pages read.

When to pick each

Pick Tines when detection and response should arrive in one product, because it accepts automated webhook notifications and does not mention a SIEM.

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 Tines alternatives and Torq alternatives, or the buyer-type rankings.