We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiSIEM and ScienceLogic 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)."The event correlation is pretty robust. The GUI is pretty good."
"Analytics. It can provide log information from the device. With log information, I can see if there is a threat"
"It gives us the opportunity to generate notifications based upon rules that get triggered, and the rules could be specific to PCI, HIPAA, GIBA, NIST, and so forth."
"It works well with medium to large-scale enterprises."
"The solution’s IP database is awesome."
"We're able to get real-timec as well as our customer networks that we're monitoring at all times."
"Fortinet FortiSIEM needs to provide better API integrations to users."
"Fortinet FortiSIEM is less costly than other products and is available 24/7."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"The power flow is great."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"The best feature is the highly flexible graphs."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"It is simple."
"The reporting feature is not very attractive for the upper management and I am not able to perform complex/nested queries."
"They need to integrate better with Cisco and Palo Alto."
"The challenge I face with Fortinet FortiSIEM is the lack of support."
"Fortinet FortiSIEM could improve to extend to several locations or sites."
"It would be good if the solution offered even more configuration options, especially in relation to the VPN so that it continues to be a very flexible option."
"The policy editing should be easier. Right now, it's too hard."
"Fortinet FortiSIEM needs to provide better API integrations to users."
"The dashboards need to be improved. It gives you so much detail, but sometimes too much detail, especially to an executive, it's too much."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"They need a little more self-service."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
Fortinet FortiSIEM is ranked 10th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 65 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 42 reviews. Fortinet FortiSIEM is rated 7.6, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSIEM writes "It's cheaper than other solutions with the same features but lacks integration with many third-party vendors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". Fortinet FortiSIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, Microsoft Sentinel and LogRhythm SIEM, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix.
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.
