Tines

Name: Tines
Brand: Tines
Rating: 4.8 (319 reviews)

Leader

The intelligent workflow platform. AI, automation and agents loved by security and IT teams.

Est 2018|Valuation $1.1B|Raised $271.7M|96 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 63K|Web traffic 93K|FTEs 400|HQ Dublin, Ireland

MarketsSecurity Information and Event Management (SIEM)Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR)IT Service Desk (ITSM)Business Process Management (BPM)Workflow Automation Agent Builder Platforms

Published Oct 23, 2026

01Common complaints

If fully transparent enterprise pricing up front is required. Tines’ public pricing stops at the Community Edition; budgeting for production may require a sales process and careful scoping. (https://www.tines.com/pricing/)
If advanced governance/oversight for a very large workflow estate is the top priority. Organizational oversight tooling for hundreds or thousands of automations has been raised as a concern in some public feedback.
If ISO 27001 certification is a hard procurement requirement. Tines’ public security page emphasizes SOC 2 Type II but does not clearly state ISO 27001 certification. (https://www.tines.com/security/)
If a SOAR that is deeply native to a specific vendor ecosystem is required. Examples include organizations standardized on the Palo Alto Cortex stack or the Splunk ecosystem, where native integrations can reduce integration effort at the cost of vendor lock-in.
If consumption-style variability for AI features cannot be tolerated. The AI Agent action uses a credit system; heavy AI automation usage requires cost governance and monitoring. (https://www.tines.com/docs/actions/types/ai-action/)

1. **If fully transparent enterprise pricing up front is required.** Tines’ public pricing stops at the Community Edition; budgeting for production may require a sales process and careful scoping. (https://www.tines.com/pricing/) 2. **If advanced governance/oversight for a very large workflow estate is the top priority.** Organizational oversight tooling for hundreds or thousands of automations has been raised as a concern in some public feedback. 3. **If ISO 27001 certification is a hard procurement requirement.** Tines’ public security page emphasizes SOC 2 Type II but does not clearly state ISO 27001 certification. (https://www.tines.com/security/) 4. **If a SOAR that is deeply native to a specific vendor ecosystem is required.** Examples include organizations standardized on the Palo Alto Cortex stack or the Splunk ecosystem, where native integrations can reduce integration effort at the cost of vendor lock-in. 5. **If consumption-style variability for AI features cannot be tolerated.** The AI Agent action uses a credit system; heavy AI automation usage requires cost governance and monitoring. (https://www.tines.com/docs/actions/types/ai-action/)

Deal disqualifiers (poor fit)

Organizations that require fully public pricing and self-serve upgrade paths without sales involvement.
Organizations that need highly prescriptive, out-of-the-box SOAR-native case management and reporting (depending on tier).
Organizations that mandate ISO 27001 certification specifically (ISO 27001 was not publicly documented in the reviewed materials).

Publicly visible limitations / constraints

Community Edition limits: 3 builders, 3 stories/flows, 5,000 daily events. This is a hard constraint for meaningful production loads. (https://www.tines.com/pricing/)
AI Agent availability: Documentation indicates AI Agent action availability differs by plan (Business/Enterprise) and uses credits; self-hosted availability and "bring your own AI model" options vary by deployment. (https://explained.tines.com/en/articles/11510164-ai-agent-action-faqs)
Governance/RBAC concerns (historical): Some reviewers have complained about RBAC and maintainability tooling; at least one older Capterra review explicitly said "No role based access control for the team in the console." Buyers should confirm current RBAC capabilities, since the product has evolved since 2019. (https://www.capterra.com/p/178319/Tines/reviews/)

- **Community Edition limits:** 3 builders, 3 stories/flows, 5,000 daily events. This is a hard constraint for meaningful production loads. (https://www.tines.com/pricing/) - **AI Agent availability:** Documentation indicates AI Agent action availability differs by plan (Business/Enterprise) and uses credits; self-hosted availability and "bring your own AI model" options vary by deployment. (https://explained.tines.com/en/articles/11510164-ai-agent-action-faqs) - **Governance/RBAC concerns (historical):** Some reviewers have complained about RBAC and maintainability tooling; at least one older Capterra review explicitly said "No role based access control for the team in the console." Buyers should confirm current RBAC capabilities, since the product has evolved since 2019. (https://www.capterra.com/p/178319/Tines/reviews/)

Roadmap notes

The vendor referenced a large planned feature set for 2025; as of January 27, 2026, buyers should request a delivered-vs-planned summary and the current 2026 roadmap. (https://www.tines.com/blog/series-c-fundraise/)

02Why they buy

Unique selling points supported by customer/review evidence

Usability and speed to automate: Multiple recent G2 reviews describe the platform as straightforward to start building workflows. (https://www.g2.com/sellers/tines)
API-first, vendor-agnostic approach: Repeated in product messaging and reviews; the approach reduces dependence on native integration marketplaces alone. (https://www.tines.com/) (https://www.g2.com/sellers/tines)

- **Usability and speed to automate:** Multiple recent G2 reviews describe the platform as straightforward to start building workflows. (https://www.g2.com/sellers/tines) - **API-first, vendor-agnostic approach:** Repeated in product messaging and reviews; the approach reduces dependence on native integration marketplaces alone. (https://www.tines.com/) (https://www.g2.com/sellers/tines)

Differentiation with AI (with caveats)

Workbench (vendor assistant) and AI Agent action introduce assistant-style workflows and conversational interfaces.
Documentation indicates model availability may vary by tenant region and that AI usage is credit-metered. (https://www.tines.com/docs/actions/types/ai-action/)

Caveat: AI-related efficiency claims are testimonial-based; validate through controlled pilots and metric definitions. (https://www.tines.com/product/workbench/)

- **Workbench** (vendor assistant) and **AI Agent** action introduce assistant-style workflows and conversational interfaces. - Documentation indicates model availability may vary by tenant region and that AI usage is credit-metered. (https://www.tines.com/docs/actions/types/ai-action/) Caveat: AI-related efficiency claims are testimonial-based; validate through controlled pilots and metric definitions. (https://www.tines.com/product/workbench/)

Areas where competitors may have advantages

Swimlane emphasizes throughput, dashboards, and packaging; these are competitor claims and should be validated in POCs and reference checks. (https://swimlane.com/swimlane-vs-tines/)

Why customers chose Tines (recurring themes)

Faster automation stand-up with a low/no-code UI.
Vendor-agnostic integration approach (API-first, cURL-to-action pattern frequently highlighted).
Positive customer support sentiment in reviews.

03Field reports

Review platform snapshot (quantity and averages)

G2: Very highly rated on G2.
Capterra: Very highly rated on Capterra; the Capterra dataset appears limited and some entries are dated.
Gartner Peer Insights: Very highly rated on Gartner Peer Insights (note that full review access may be gated).

Direct quotes (positive)

From G2 (examples):

"Overall I find the platform to be very intuitive and easy to use… Implementation from start to finish requires little prior knowledge of API integrations…" (Verified User)
"Tines is incredibly easy to use, even without a coding background… customer support replies promptly and is always helpful." (Verified User)

From Capterra:

"Flexibility for manual tasks automation… our performance increased significantly." (Reviewer)
"We’ve used Tines to break down our processes into a number of easily automatable steps…" (Reviewer)

From G2 (examples): - "Overall I find the platform to be very intuitive and easy to use… Implementation from start to finish requires little prior knowledge of API integrations…" (Verified User) - "Tines is incredibly easy to use, even without a coding background… customer support replies promptly and is always helpful." (Verified User) From Capterra: - "Flexibility for manual tasks automation… our performance increased significantly." (Reviewer) - "We’ve used Tines to break down our processes into a number of easily automatable steps…" (Reviewer)

Direct quotes (negative / criticisms)

From Capterra:

"Integration with other solution could be a little bit difficult due to lack of documentation or poor examples related." (Reviewer)
"No role based access control for the team in the console." (Reviewer)

From reproduced Peer/Analyst feedback:

"Dislike pricing based on number of automations rather than number of automation executions…"
"Tines will need to find some way for their customers to ensure maintainability as their requirements grow. These organizational oversight tools don’t yet exist in Tines."
"The tunneling functionality is also very immature… We forewent the tunnel entirely when we found out it had inadequate inbuilt controls."

Caveat: Some reproduced analyst feedback appears on competitor pages and may reflect a biased presentation; buyers should validate directly on original review platforms when possible.

From Capterra: - "Integration with other solution could be a little bit difficult due to lack of documentation or poor examples related." (Reviewer) - "No role based access control for the team in the console." (Reviewer) From reproduced Peer/Analyst feedback: - "Dislike pricing based on number of automations rather than number of automation executions…" - "Tines will need to find some way for their customers to ensure maintainability as their requirements grow. These organizational oversight tools don’t yet exist in Tines." - "The tunneling functionality is also very immature… We forewent the tunnel entirely when we found out it had inadequate inbuilt controls." Caveat: Some reproduced analyst feedback appears on competitor pages and may reflect a biased presentation; buyers should validate directly on original review platforms when possible.

Why some customers might leave / churn drivers (inferred from complaints)

Enterprise RBAC/governance and maintainability issues as workflow complexity grows.
Documentation depth (integration/auth examples) for edge cases.
Pricing model concerns depending on how usage is metered at paid tiers.

Because public churn reasons are rarely openly published by vendors, these are inferred from review complaints and competitor comparisons.

Vendor-published outcomes and their limitations

Critical evaluation: Buyers should request:

A reference call with a similar-sized customer
Before/after operational metrics definitions (MTTR, MTTD, analyst time saved)
A breakdown of what "actions" mean (per run, per step, per event)

The vendor publishes customer case studies and outcome claims. These include high-volume automation activity claims and marketing-style efficiency improvements. These metrics are vendor-reported and are not independently audited in public materials. Critical evaluation: Buyers should request: - A reference call with a similar-sized customer - Before/after operational metrics definitions (MTTR, MTTD, analyst time saved) - A breakdown of what "actions" mean (per run, per step, per event)

Internal case study example (Tines using Tines for SOC 2)

Critical evaluation: This is a self-referential case study and not independent validation. It does illustrate a plausible automation use case (evidence gathering, audit workflows) and a realistic multi-week to multi-month timeline for compliance readiness work.

The vendor published an internal case study describing the use of automation to accelerate evidence collection for compliance and reported substantial human-hour reductions and a multi-month timeline to prepare controls evidence. Critical evaluation: This is a self-referential case study and not independent validation. It does illustrate a plausible automation use case (evidence gathering, audit workflows) and a realistic multi-week to multi-month timeline for compliance readiness work.

04Best fit

Company sizes (practical ranges)

Mid-market to enterprise: Organizations with significant SecOps/ITOps needs and many tools to orchestrate.
Also viable for smaller teams: The free Community Edition supports experimentation and limited production use.

Industries/verticals

Commonly represented industries include computer and network security, IT services, software, financial services, and other sectors with complex tooling footprints.

Roles and personas

Decision makers: CISO, Head of Security Operations, VP IT, Director of Infrastructure/Operations.
Champions/end users: SOC analysts, security engineers, IT automation engineers, incident response leads, compliance/GRC operations.

Pain points addressed

Alert fatigue and manual triage
Ticket routing and enrichment
Incident response playbooks that span many tools
Employee lifecycle workflows (onboarding/offboarding)
Compliance evidence collection and reporting workflows

Qualification criteria (good fit)

Organizations with many SaaS/security tools that offer APIs and require orchestration.
Organizations seeking vendor-neutral automation rather than committing to a single SIEM/SOAR ecosystem.
Organizations willing to invest in workflow engineering practices (naming conventions, change control, documentation) to keep automations maintainable.

05The pitch

What the product does (objective core value proposition)

In practical terms, Tines competes in and around SOAR (security orchestration, automation, and response) and adjacent automation categories (iPaaS-like integration, operational automation, ticketing/incident response automation). It supports vendor-agnostic integrations: if a system has an API, Tines can usually interact with it via HTTP actions and a library of prebuilt templates/workflows.

Tines is a workflow automation and orchestration platform designed to help teams build, run, and monitor "stories" (workflows) that connect tools via APIs and automate repetitive operational tasks. The product includes AI-assisted automation features layered on top of workflow building. In practical terms, Tines competes in and around SOAR (security orchestration, automation, and response) and adjacent automation categories (iPaaS-like integration, operational automation, ticketing/incident response automation). It supports vendor-agnostic integrations: if a system has an API, Tines can usually interact with it via HTTP actions and a library of prebuilt templates/workflows.

Target market and market positioning

Primary buyers/users: Security Operations (SOC), incident response, GRC/compliance automation, IT operations, infrastructure/engineering ops.
Positioning: Originated in security operations and positioned as vendor-agnostic, with emphasis on governance/guardrails and usability for mixed technical skill levels.
Customer segment trend: Review data indicates a notable enterprise footprint.

Get a comprehensive analysis of Tines including market position, competitive landscape, adoption trends, and peer benchmarks.

Download full report →