We performed a comparison between Devo and i-SIEM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Microsoft, Wazuh and others in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)."It's very, very versatile."
"Devo has a really good website for creating custom configurations."
"The most valuable feature is that it has native MSSP capabilities and maintains perfect data separation. It does all of that in a very easy-to-manage cloud-based solution."
"The alerting is much better than I anticipated. We don't get as many alerts as I thought we would, but that nobody's fault, it's just the way it is."
"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"The querying and the log-retention capabilities are pretty powerful. Those provide some of the biggest value-add for us."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the ability that Devo has to ingest data. From the previous SIEM that I came from and helped my company administer, it really was the type of system where data was parsed on ingest. This meant that if you didn't build the parser efficiently or correctly, sometimes that would bring the system to its knees. You'd have a backlog of processing the logs as it was ingesting them."
"The user interface is really modern. As an end-user, there are a lot of possibilities to tailor the platform to your needs, and that can be done without needing much support from Devo. It's really flexible and modular. The UI is very clean."
"As a result of the automation, we are able to manage SIEM with a small security team. I'm in a unique position where we have been growing the security organization quite rapidly over the last three and a half years. But, as a direct result of the empow transition and legacy collection of tools towards the empow platform, we've been able to keep that head count flat. We've been able to redirect a lot of the security team's time away from the wash, rinse, repeat activities of responding to alarms where we have a high degree of confidence that they will be false positives, adjusting the rules accordingly. This can be a bit frustrating for the analyst when they have to spend hours a day dealing with these types of probable false positives. So, it has helped not only us keep our headcount flat relative to the resources necessary to provide the assurances that our executives expect of us for monitoring, but allows our analyst team to spend the majority of their time doing what they love. They are spending their time meaningfully with a higher degree of confidence and enjoying getting into the incident response type activity."
"The overall performance of extraction could be a lot faster, but that's a common problem in this space in general. Also, the stock or default alerting and detecting options could definitely be broader and more all-encompassing. The fact that they're not is why we had to write all our own alerts."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
"Some third-parties don't have specific API connectors built, so we had to work with Devo to get the logs and parse the data using custom parsers, rather than an out-of-the-box solution."
"Where Devo has room for improvement is the data ingestion and parsing. We tend to have to work with the Devo support team to bring on and ingest new sources of data."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."
"Relative to keeping up with the sheer pace of cloud-native technologies, it should provide more options for clients to deploy their technologies in unique ways. This is an area that I recommend that they maintain focus."
Earn 20 points
Devo is ranked 19th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 21 reviews while i-SIEM is ranked 44th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM). Devo is rated 8.4, while i-SIEM is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Devo writes "Keeps 400 days of hot data, covers our cloud products, and has a high ingestion rate and super easy log integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of i-SIEM writes "The alert fatigue and false positive rates have just plummeted, which is really exciting". Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Sentinel, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas i-SIEM is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, AWS Security Hub, AlienVault OSSIM and IBM Watson for Cyber Security.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.
