We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Cynet based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: IBM Security QRadar users say the solution provides extensive information and helpful leads for locating pertinent data. QRadar stands out with its comprehensive network visibility and strong SIEM capabilities. Cynet offers strong ransomware protection and an intuitive interface. IBM Security QRadar could improve its rule deployment and lower its false positive rate. Users would also like expanded storage capacity, streamlined user management, and a more mature architecture. Cynet needs to expand device support and add customization options. Users suggest improving network monitoring and strengthening integration with other tools.
Service and Support: Some customers of IBM Security QRadar have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. Cynet's customer service is consistently lauded for its excellence. They have a dedicated support team that is available round the clock, and they also have a contingency plan for urgent incidents.
Ease of Deployment: IBM Security QRadar's initial setup can be complex for users without expertise, and the difficulty may vary depending on the size of the data set. Cynet’s setup is highly efficient, with the ability to configure thousands of devices quickly.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. Customers generally think Cynet is affordable and a good value for its features.
ROI: IBM Security QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. Cynet yields an excellent ROI by preventing cyberattacks and safeguarding sensitive data.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer IBM Security QRadar over Cynet. The advanced security features and overall strength of QRadar make it the favored option. Users like QRadar's extensive and actionable insights, user-friendly interface, and adaptability. QRadar offers a comprehensive overview of network activity and risk management.
"The comprehensiveness of Microsoft's threat detection is good."
"A crucial aspect for our team is the inclusion of identity and access management tools from the vendor."
"I like that it's fully integrated with Windows, Microsoft 365 Exchange Online, and Outlook. It is better than other antivirus solutions because it's fully integrated with all Microsoft products. It's easy to integrate them and onboard all Windows devices from SCCM."
"Advanced hunting is good. I like that. We can drill down to lots of details."
"We can automate routine tasks and write scripts to carry out difficult tasks, which makes things easier for us."
"The most valuable features are spam filtering, attachment filtering, and antivirus protection."
"The most valuable feature is probably the aggregation and correlation of the different telemetry points with Defender for Identity, Defender for Endpoint, and Defender for Cloud Apps. All of these various things are part of that portal. We've wanted that single pane of glass for years."
"There is also one dashboard that shows us the status of many controls at once and the details I can get... It gives a great overview of many areas, such as files, emails, chats, and links. Even with the apps, it gives you a great overview. In one place you can see where you should look into things more deeply..."
"I like that it is possible to use the solution to check more information about the users' devices."
"It's transparent, so it's not something where every user has to press a button to download or do the thing. It is centralized, in fact. Personally, I use Malwarebytes and other tools, which are fine for home use. Cynet is also relatively silent in terms of operation, except when it's required to act."
"The product has valuable front-end features."
"The feature I find most valuable, is the reality graphical user interface."
"The initial setup is very fast and very easy."
"We are very satisfied with the level of performance we get."
"A reliable security system that automatically quarantines anything suspicious."
"It provides good protection from ransomware and malware attacks. It is very good as compared to other products. If any threat is there, their support is very good. They immediately respond to the users and do a follow-up. They call us and also provide email support."
"Vulnerability data, network data and the like, are part of correlation and detection."
"The best part of this solution is having a third-party SOC."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with the GRD, for banking."
"What we like about QRadar and the models that IBM has, is it can go from a small-to-medium enterprise to a larger organization, and it gives you the same value."
"It provides many options for searching. I can see devices from different vendors, like Cisco, in one interface, which is good for me."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features would have to be the products' ability to customize vulnerability management settings."
"We are using the platform version, which I like."
"There should be better information for experts on features in the solution. What I see when reading about features in Microsoft 365 Defender is that it is always general information. If Microsoft could go deeper into details for the experts about how to use the tools, usage of it would be more familiar and it would be easier to use."
"When discussing the secure score, which includes overviews and recommended actions, some of these recommended actions are not applicable to us, particularly those related to Microsoft Internet Explorer, which we do not use in any of our environments."
"While the XDR platform offers valuable functionalities, it falls short of other solutions in its ability to deliver a cohesive identity experience."
"Sometimes, configurations take much longer than expected."
"The solution could improve by having better machine learning and AI. Additionally, the interface, documentation, and integration could be better."
"There are a few technical issues with Defender XDR that can be improved. Sometimes, the endpoint devices are not reporting properly to the Defender 365 portal. When you're getting all the information from the Microsoft portal, the devices are sometimes not in sync. We have hundreds of endpoint devices, some needing to be onboarded again."
"The cost can be high if you want to build custom license packages. Another area for improvement is the policies. In Azure, we need to implement policies in JSON format, but in 365 Defender 365, it would be helpful to use a different format so we can customize the platform."
"I would like more of the features in Defender for 365 to be included in the smaller licenses. Even if I buy a small license and don't need everything, security shouldn't be a question. Security is one of the main aspects of all projects from our side, so it would be nice to have more features in the smaller licenses."
"The reporting is a little weak and could be improved. The other downside is that Cynet does not use the local time zone. It's based off of Greenwich Mean Time."
"Cynet fails to deploy the same technology in mobile devices."
"It is an endpoint agent, but they don't have a probe for checking the network traffic. They could improve from this point of view."
"Its dashboard is not so good. On the dashboard, they don't show the count for client endpoints, which is a failure of this product. This count should be shown on the dashboard. I have 1,000 clients, but I can't see it anywhere on the dashboard."
"I would like to see more emphasis on building the data lake and storing all endpoint data in the enterprise data lake so that data mining can be performed"
"I cannot provide more details about Cynet's automation features. While Cynet claims to be automated, the specifics of this automation are unclear. They claim to have a high capability to detect and block attacks, but I am cautious about companies that claim to solve every problem without limitations. It does help in identifying malware on the network but doesn't specifically identify vulnerabilities."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the usability of this product for new threats. Meaning, not everything which is new is properly seen by the product and not all the required actions are taken."
"Automation could be improved, and orchestration could be added to the features."
"There needs to be better integration with other applications."
"The AI engine could be smarter."
"QRadar needs a lot of fine tuning"
"The modularity could be improved."
"I need a solution which will send alerts in the event of any behavior."
"Its architecture is very complicated."
"I don't give it a 10 because it is something we have to request. I would love it if UBA was included out of the box like Microsoft."
"We would like to see better instrumentation for debugging changes in the log flow."
Cynet is ranked 4th in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) with 35 reviews while IBM Security QRadar is ranked 1st in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) with 198 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security. See our Cynet vs. IBM Security QRadar report.
See our list of best User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) vendors, best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) 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.
