We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and IBM Watson for Cyber Security 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."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."
"I've worked on most of the top SIEM solutions, and Sentinel has an edge in most areas. For example, it has built-in SOAR capabilities, allowing you to run playbooks automatically. Other vendors typically offer SOAR as a separate licensed solution or module, but you get it free with Sentinel. In-depth incident integration is available out of the box."
"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 ability of all these solutions to work together natively is essential. We have an Azure subscription, including Log Analytics. This feature automatically acts as one of the security baselines and detects recommendations because it also integrates with Defender. We can pull the sysadmin logs from Azure. It's all seamless and native."
"Sentinel uses Azure Logic Apps for automation, which is really powerful. This allows us to easily automate responses to incidents."
"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."
"I like the KQL query. It simplifies getting data from the table and seeing the logs. All you need to know are the table names. It's quite easy to build use cases by using KQL."
"The most valuable feature is the onboarding of the workloads. You can see all that has been onboarded in your account on the dashboards."
"We have worked with other solutions, such as LogRhythm and Splunk. Compared to others, IBM QRadar has the best price-performance ratio so that you are able to reserve minimum costs. It starts settling in fast and gets the first results very quickly. It is also very scalable."
"It's built around Red Hat Linux, which is highly robust."
"No doubt about it, the solution is extremely stable."
"IBM QRadar is great help from its security event monitoring to data center and NOC troubleshooting of issues hard for other departments to spot."
"Technical support is good overall."
"It is very stable. We have not faced interruptions in the past four and a half years."
"There are more than 120 extensions in QRadar, which are easy to install and configure. These can improve your analysis of events."
"The visibility it gives you into your infrastructure has been great."
"The most valuable features of IBM Watson for Cyber Security are ease of use and out-of-the-box reports and compliance policies. Additionally, if there are aspects that are missing IBM add them in the next release."
"IBM Watson for Cyber Security is very stable."
"The most valuable feature of this product is innovation, where the research and upgrading of technology never ends."
"The customer support is very good."
"They're giving us the queries so we can plug them right into Sentinel. They need to have a streamlined process for updating them in the tool and knowing when things are updated and knowing when there are new detections available from Microsoft."
"Currently, the watchlist feature is being utilized, and although there have been improvements, it is still not fully optimized."
"We are invoiced according to the amount of data generated within each log."
"Sentinel still has some anomalies. For example, sometimes when we write a query for log analysis with KQL, it doesn't give us the data in a proper way... Also, the fields or columns could be improved. Sometimes, it is not giving the desired results and there is a blank field."
"The interface could be more user-friendly. It''s a small improvement that they could make if they wanted to."
"We do see continuous improvement all the time, however, I haven't got a specific feature that is lacking or not well designed."
"At the network level, there is a limitation in integrating some of the switches or routers with Microsoft Sentinel. Currently, SPAN traffic monitoring is not available in Microsoft Sentinel. I have heard that it is available in Defender for Identity, which is a different product. It would be good if LAN traffic monitoring or SPAN traffic monitoring is available in Microsoft Sentinel. It would add a lot of value. It is available in some of the competitor products in the market."
"Sentinel could improve its ticketing and management. A few customers I have worked with liked to take the data created in Sentinel. You can make some basic efforts around that, but the customers wanted to push it to a third-party system so they could set up a proper ticketing management system, like ServiceNow, Jira, etc."
"Each module requires a separate license and a separate cost."
"There is one problem with QRadar in regards to the add-on apps. The apps can be frustrating. For example, when I add a big app like one of the add-ons for resiliency, add-on applications for QRadar, these applications require different hardware to implement and to deploy. The resiliency connector because there's a considerable amount of data scanning, operates for these apps correctly."
"There are reports that I would like to generate that are either not included, or I cannot find."
"Solution has too many menus that require going to two or three sub-monitors to enter the QRadar."
"They should speed up the incident response and also, at the same time, reduce the amount of manual effort that is required."
"They need to improve their threat intelligence feed and they need to improve their user behavior analytics modules."
"I have also been working with other SIEM solutions, and I have observed that they have extensive Linux-based and Unix-based integrations. They have been able to support some of the Linux-based agents, which is useful to investigate and process the information on the Linux and Unix side."
"What needs to be improved in IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is the user experience. It's not optimal. Some screens are a bit clunky. The solution needs to be more user-friendly."
"In the future, I would like to see threat intelligence included."
"They need to continue to build the AI capabilities."
"This is an expensive product, so making it more cost-effective would be an improvement."
"The dashboard could improve in IBM Watson for Cyber Security."
More IBM Watson for Cyber Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while IBM Watson for Cyber Security is ranked 45th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 4 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while IBM Watson for Cyber Security is rated 8.0. 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 IBM Watson for Cyber Security writes "An innovative and stable product that is well maintained and always up-to-date". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Sentinel, whereas IBM Watson for Cyber Security is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security and i-SIEM. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. IBM Watson for Cyber Security 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.