We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Sentinel based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."You can fine-tune the SOAR and you'll be charged only when your playbooks are triggered. That is the beauty of the solution because the SOAR is the costliest component in the market today... but with Sentinel it is upside-down: the SOAR is the lowest-hanging fruit. It's the least costly and it delivers more value to the customer."
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based."
"The main benefit is the ease of integration."
"Sentinel enables us to ingest data from our entire ecosystem. In addition to integrating our Cisco ASA Firewall logs, we get our Palo Alto proxy logs and some on-premises data coming from our hardware devices... That is very important and is one way Sentinel is playing a wider role in our environment."
"Native integration with Microsoft security products or other Microsoft software is also crucial. For example, we can integrate Sentinel with Office 365 with one click. Other integrations aren't as easy. Sometimes, we have to do it manually."
"Having your logs put all in one place with machine learning working on those logs is a good feature. I don't need to start thinking, "Where are my logs?" My logs are in a centralized repository, like Log Analytics, which is why you can't use Sentinel without Log Analytics. Having all those logs in one place is an advantage."
"The automation rules and playbooks are the most useful that I've seen. A number of other places segregate the automation and playbook as separate tools, whereas Microsoft is a SIEM and SOAR tool in one."
"Sentinel's most important feature is the ability to centralize all the logs in one place. There's no need to search multiple systems for information."
"Provided that the report is prebuilt and I can find what I am looking for, the reporting is the most valuable feature in this solution."
"I have found its network traffic log, network bit log, and QBI most valuable."
"The tool helps with infrastructure, application, and network monitoring."
"The simplicity of the solution is the best feature."
"It comes with many rules disabled. You can tune them and modify them according to your enterprise needs and avoid false positives."
"I think the QDI is very good."
"The product provides a complete platform for ingesting the log, doing the correlations and handling the runtime."
"IBM QRadar has improved my organization by introducing many functions. It collects logs from all of our systems in the organization and has functioned very well. It alerts and correlates the aggregate events or offenses we receive through all the applications we use."
"It makes everything easier by automating some tasks and growing with our needs."
"One of the most valuable features is the business intelligence engine. It's very important because it keeps track of everything that's happening and alerts us if something is different than expected. The first time I used it, I was shocked at how well it performed. Another valuable feature that I think makes this product worth the price you pay for it is that it connects to basically every system that provides some form of logging, and it's very easy to set up what triggers this."
"Sentinel gave us logs to tell us what's going right and wrong in your environment so we could secure the network."
"The stability is phenomenal and we never had any issues with downtime or even had to restart."
"The tool is simple to use."
"The solution's Kusto Query Language (KQL) execution time is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it provides a central locking system for many event sources."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible log for identifying security threats inside an application. Sentinel is very good at this."
"Sometimes, we are observing large ingestion delays. We expect logs within 5 minutes, but it takes about 10 to 15 minutes."
"Microsoft Sentinel is relatively expensive, and its cost should be improved."
"They should just add more and more out-of-the-box connectors. It is quite a new product, and it has a lot of connectors, and even more would be good."
"If Sentinel had a graphical user interface, it would be easier to use. I would also like it to be more customizable."
"The reporting could be more structured."
"Given that I am in the small business space, I wish they would make it easier to operate Sentinel without being a Sentinel expert. Examples of things that could be easier are creating alerts and automations from scratch and designing workbooks."
"Microsoft Sentinel should provide an alternative query language to KQL for users who lack KQL expertise."
"They need to work with other security vendors. For example, we replaced our email gateway with Symantec, but we couldn't collect these logs with Azure Sentinel. Instead of collecting these logs with Azure Sentinel, we are collecting them on Qradar. We couldn't do it with Sentinel, which is a problem for us."
"The user interface is a bit difficult to get used to."
"Integration could be better. They should make it easy to integrate with other solutions."
"The technical support can be improved a little bit, and the price could be cheaper."
"Whenever we are upgrading or installing any type of patch, at that time we have some delays."
"IBM Qradar could improve the reporting. The tool is not designed to report. It's a great operational monitoring tool. You put it on a screen and you watch it. If you want to have analytics out of it, that's a whole different story. You're going to need more people and tools. What should be added is reporting and integration into Power BI, into some capability that produces analytical reports from the source data. IBM does not seem to care to add these features."
"QRadar needs a lot of fine tuning"
"The threat intelligence functionality can be better. In addition, it can have more monitoring capabilities."
"The solution could improve by having more out-of-the-box use cases."
"The dashboard and customer view should be improved"
"This product's connection to certain types of cloud systems could be improved. We can do Microsoft, Google, and Amazon, but there are a lot of other things happening in the cloud that we do not connect well enough to. This product could be improved with better connection to cloud-based solutions."
"Creating a drag-and-drop dashboard or workbook in Sentinel is a little more complex compared to other tools like LogRhythm and IBM QRadar."
"I rate Sentinel a six out of ten for scalability."
"There is no integration in the web-side of the tool."
"There is a need for more flexibility in customization, especially when working with different vendors and platforms."
"It is an ancient product."
"The solution does not allow outsourced authorizations."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while Sentinel is ranked 18th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 15 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Sentinel is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sentinel writes "An automated solution that helped me detect threats in less than half the time it used to take". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Fortinet FortiSIEM, whereas Sentinel is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Google Chronicle Suite, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM). See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Sentinel report.
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.