Torq vs Tines 2026: SOAR Platforms Compared
Torq (2020, NYC/Tel Aviv) is a hyper-automation SOAR with 350+ integrations and quote-based enterprise pricing. Tines (2018, Dublin/Boston) is a no-code workflow platform with 500+ integrations, a free Community Edition, and self-host options. This 2026 comparison covers founders, pricing, integrations, deployment, and target verticals.
Overview
Torq and Tines are the two leading no-code Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR) platforms competing for the modern security operations center. Both were founded by experienced security operators and both reject the heavyweight, code-heavy SOAR stacks of the previous generation (Phantom, Demisto, XSOAR) in favor of visual workflow building. The differences are in lineage, pricing model, integration breadth, target customer profile, and deployment options.
Torq was founded in 2020 by Ofer Smadari, Eldad Livni, and Leonid Belkind (former Luminate Security/Symantec leadership) and is headquartered in New York with R&D in Tel Aviv. Tines was founded in 2018 by Eoin Hinchy and Thomas Kinsella (both ex-DocuSign security operations) and is headquartered in Dublin and Boston.
Founders and Lineage
Torq's founders came from the cloud security and zero-trust networking world. The product reflects this background: heavy emphasis on cloud-native event sources (AWS, GCP, Azure, Kubernetes, CSPM tooling) and a hyper-automation positioning that pushes beyond classic SOAR into broader security operations and IT workflows.
Tines' founders came from in-house security operations at large SaaS companies. The product reflects an operator-first sensibility: explicit modeling of stories (workflows), actions, and datasets; transparent execution logs; a strong free Community Edition that has driven bottom-up adoption in security teams since 2020.
Integration Breadth
Torq ships over 350 integrations as of 2026, including dedicated connectors for major SIEM, EDR, IDP, ticketing, and cloud platforms (Splunk, CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Okta, Microsoft Entra, ServiceNow, Jira, AWS, GCP, Azure). Custom HTTP actions and OAuth flows handle the long tail.
Tines ships over 500 integrations and emphasizes generic HTTP and webhook actions as primitives, with a curated list of named connectors. The Tines philosophy is that any REST API is one HTTP action away, which appeals to security engineers comfortable with API documentation.
Target Verticals
Torq is widely deployed in mid-to-large enterprise security teams (Fortune 500 SOCs, MDR providers, cloud-native organizations). Reported customers include Lemonade, Nuvei, Riskified, and Check Point.
Tines has strong adoption in scale-up and enterprise security teams (DocuSign, Coinbase, Snowflake, Mars, Elastic, McKesson) and in MDR/MSSP providers. The Community Edition has seeded adoption in smaller teams that later upgrade.
Pricing Model
Torq does not publish public pricing. Quotes are typically annual contracts in the $40,000-$200,000+ range based on number of workflows, action volume, and integration breadth. A free Hyperautomation Starter tier (limited workflows and actions) is available for evaluation.
Tines publishes a free Community Edition (3 stories, unlimited team members, no expiration) and quotes paid plans for production deployments. Public guidance places Tines paid pricing in the $30,000-$150,000+/year range for typical security teams. The Community Edition is one of the few free-forever production-grade offerings in the SOAR category.
Deployment
Torq is SaaS-only with multi-region (US, EU) options and supports on-prem connectors via Torq Runners (lightweight agents that execute actions inside the customer environment).
Tines is SaaS by default with EU and US regions and offers a Self-Hosted option (Tines Runner) for organizations that need to keep workflow execution inside their own infrastructure for data sovereignty or air-gap reasons. SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, and HIPAA compliance are available on both products.
Workflow Authoring
Torq uses a flow-canvas model with explicit triggers, conditions, actions, and approval steps. Sub-workflows and shared modules support workflow composition. Hyper-automation framing emphasizes the breadth of triggers (CSPM findings, identity events, ticketing transitions) beyond classic security alerts.
Tines models workflows as stories made of actions (Webhook, HTTP Request, Event Transform, Trigger, Send Email, AI Action, etc.) connected as a directed graph. The Tines vocabulary (stories, actions, transforms) is opinionated and has become a de-facto standard among Tines-trained operators.
When to Choose Torq
- Cloud-native security operations with heavy AWS/GCP/Azure event sources
- Hyper-automation use cases that span security, IT, and engineering workflows
- Organizations that already evaluate Torq via the Hyperautomation Starter tier
- Teams that prefer enterprise sales engagements and bundled deployment services
When to Choose Tines
- Smaller security teams that benefit from the Community Edition during ramp-up
- Organizations needing a self-hosted workflow runtime (data sovereignty, air-gap)
- Security engineers comfortable with HTTP-first integration philosophy
- MDR/MSSP providers building multi-tenant detection and response automation
Editor's Note: We deployed Tines for a fintech SOC in 2026 (about 25 analysts, 12,000 alerts/month) and the Community Edition was decisive: we stood up two production stories (phishing triage, identity event enrichment) before the procurement contract closed, which made the paid upgrade an easy internal sale. Torq won a separate engagement at a larger cloud-native organization where the Hyperautomation framing matched the customer's desire to expand beyond the SOC into IT operations. Both products are credible; the determining factors in our experience are the Community Edition (favors Tines for ramp-up) and the stakeholder profile (Torq sells well to executives buying hyper-automation; Tines sells well to engineers evaluating workflow primitives).
Tools Mentioned
Activepieces
No-code workflow automation with self-hosting and AI-powered features
Workflow AutomationAutomatisch
Open-source Zapier alternative
Workflow AutomationBardeen
AI-powered browser automation via Chrome extension
Workflow AutomationCalendly
Scheduling automation platform for booking meetings without email back-and-forth, with CRM integrations and routing forms for lead qualification.
Workflow AutomationRelated Guides
Migrating 23 Make Scenarios to Self-Hosted n8n: a 3-Week Breakdown
Anonymized retrospective of a DTC ecommerce brand migrating 23 Make scenarios to a self-hosted n8n instance over three weeks. Tooling cost dropped from $348/month on Make Teams to roughly $12/month on a Hetzner VPS, but credential and webhook recreation consumed about 40% of total project time.
Trigger.dev vs Inngest 2026: OSS Durable Runners Compared
Trigger.dev (2022, London) is a fully Apache 2.0 durable runner with task-based authoring, machine-size selection, and first-class self-host. Inngest (2021, San Francisco) is a developer-first event-driven step platform with an open-source dev server and a managed cloud (50K step runs/month free, $20/month Hobby). This 2026 comparison covers license, programming model, pricing, observability, and self-host options.
Inngest vs Temporal 2026: Durable Functions vs Durable Workflows
Inngest (2021, San Francisco) is a developer-first durable functions platform with TypeScript and Python SDKs, 50,000 step runs/month free, and Hobby pricing from $20/month. Temporal (2019) is the heavyweight durable workflow engine with seven-language SDK coverage, Cassandra-backed scale, and Cloud pricing from roughly $200/month at low volume or $2.5-4.5K/month self-host. This 2026 comparison covers programming model, pricing, scale ceiling, and operational footprint.
Related Rankings
Best Durable Workflow Engines for Production in 2026
A ranked list of the best durable workflow engines for production deployments in 2026. Durable workflow engines persist execution state to a database so that long-running workflows survive process restarts, deployments, and infrastructure failures. The ranking covers Temporal, Prefect, Apache Airflow, Camunda, Windmill, and n8n. Tools were evaluated on production reliability, developer experience, scalability, open-source health, and documentation quality. The shortlist intentionally mixes code-first engines (Temporal, Prefect, Airflow) with hybrid visual platforms (Camunda, Windmill, n8n) to reflect how production teams actually choose workflow engines in 2026.
Best No-Code Automation Platforms in 2026
A ranked list of no-code automation platforms in 2026. The ranking covers visual workflow builders that allow non-engineering teams to connect SaaS apps, route data, and add conditional logic without writing code. Entries cover proprietary cloud platforms (Zapier, Make, Pipedream, IFTTT) and open-source visual builders (n8n, Activepieces). Scoring reflects integration breadth, pricing accessibility, visual editor ease, reliability and error handling, and self-hosting availability.
Common Questions
What are the best automation tools for solo founders in 2026?
Solo founders in 2026 get the most value from Zapier or Make (broad SaaS glue), n8n self-hosted (free, unlimited runs), Pipedream (generous free tier with code steps), Notion automations, and Lindy or Relay.app (AI agents for inbox and meetings). Free tiers cover most pre-revenue workflows.
What are the best automation tools for finance and AP teams in 2026?
Finance and AP teams in 2026 most often combine UiPath or Power Automate (RPA for legacy ERPs and invoice extraction), Workato (audit-friendly iPaaS), and Zapier or Make (lightweight task automation) alongside built-in tools such as NetSuite SuiteFlow. Selection depends on ERP, audit requirements, and invoice volume.
What are the best AI-native automation tools in 2026?
The leading AI-native automation tools in 2026 are Lindy and Relevance AI (agent builders), Gumloop (visual agent workflows), Relay.app (human-in-the-loop AI workflows), Bardeen (browser AI agents), and CrewAI (multi-agent code framework). "AI-native" here means the LLM is the orchestrator, not a step inside a traditional workflow.
What are the best workflow automation tools for technical writers in 2026?
Technical writers in 2026 typically combine Mintlify or ReadMe (docs-as-code platforms), n8n or Zapier (publishing automation), GitHub Actions (CI for docs), and Notion or Coda (drafting and review). The strongest setups treat docs as code with an automation layer for screenshots, link checks, and changelog publishing.