We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Nagios Log Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."An engineer can live-monitor all the flow happening in real-time. This would help us a lot while investigating a case, and it would even help us with preventive actions."
"I have found the most important features to be the flexibility, tech framework, and disk manager."
"The product can scale."
"I have found IBM QRadar to be scalable."
"The stability is good."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is how it monitors the real network. That is its leading security feature."
"The most valuable feature is the QRadar Vulnerability Manager which provides vulnerability scans. In addition, I like the way QRadar generates alerts."
"Customer service is very good and very helpful."
"The initial setup of Nagios Log Server was easy and straightforward."
"The product is scalable."
"A great feature of the solution involves its internal portal."
"One of the most valuable features is the dashboard because the UI was effective and easy to use. The alert systems are good as well. We had no failovers and had high availability. We can search the queries fast as well in Nagios Log Server."
"It provides an easy way to identify errors and spot issues, making troubleshooting more efficient."
"QRadar needs to be improved on the storage side, particularly when the disc exceeded the maximum threshold."
"Dashboards and reports could provide better visualization of SIEM activity."
"The released patch quality is poor. IBM should test those patches on their side, not on the client's side."
"The usability of interfaces could be improved."
"While the interface is easy to use, it could be a little more responsive."
"We need more features in order to create rules to detect or to meet some requirements for other areas, for example, catching the event from other authentication tools."
"Whenever we are upgrading or installing any type of patch, at that time we have some delays."
"Search capability and indexing still lag behind competitors. We also need to see improved rule based access controls and rule/event tuning."
"The customization and dashboards have shortcomings and need to be improved to make the tool look more presentable."
"The support could be better."
"The configurations during initial setup could be improved. If they could be agentless, as in the case of the Ansible product, it would be better. I would like to be able to analyze the network bandwidth."
"It would be beneficial for Nagios to incorporate a tool that goes beyond log management and includes features to monitor overall system health and assess the effectiveness of antivirus solutions."
"As we are talking about a product which is open to the public, the pricing makes it challenging for us to profit off of its marketing."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while Nagios Log Server is ranked 40th in Log Management with 5 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Nagios Log Server is rated 7.8. 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 Nagios Log Server writes "A scalable and affordable tool for monitoring data centers ". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas Nagios Log Server is most compared with Wazuh, Graylog, LogRhythm SIEM, syslog-ng and Security Onion. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Nagios Log Server report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Log Management 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.