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."What is most useful, is that it has a good connection to the Microsoft ecosystem, and I think that's the key part."
"I like the unified security console. You can close incidents using Sentinel in all other Microsoft Security portals, when it comes to incident response."
"The SOAR playbooks are Sentinel's most valuable feature. It gives you a unified toolset for detecting, investigating, and responding to incidents. That's what clearly differentiates Sentinels from its competitors. It's cloud-native, offering end-to-end coverage with more than 120 connectors. All types of data logs can be poured into the system so analysis can happen. That end-to-end visibility gives it the advantage."
"The native integration of the Microsoft security solution has been essential because it helps reduce some false positives, especially with some of the impossible travel rules that may be configured in Microsoft 365. For some organizations, that might be benign because they're using VPNs, etc."
"Sentinel pricing is good"
"I like the ability to run custom KQL queries. I don't know if that feature is specific to Sentinel. As far as I know, they are using technology built into Azure's Log Analytics app. Sentinel integrates with that, and we use this functionality heavily."
"The in-built SOAR of Sentinel is valuable. Kusto Query Language is also valuable for the ease of writing queries and ease of getting insights from the logs. Schedule-based queries within Sentinel are also valuable. I found these three features most useful for my projects."
"If you know how to do KQL (kusto query language) queries, which are how you query the log data inside Sentinel, the information is pretty rich. You can get down to a good level of detail regarding event information or notifications."
"It comes with many rules disabled. You can tune them and modify them according to your enterprise needs and avoid false positives."
"IBM Security QRadar has significantly improved our incident response procedures."
"It allows us to search data both on-premises and on the cloud."
"Vulnerability detection is the most valuable feature. It's the tool that finds the threats."
"We are using the platform version, which I like."
"The support is very good. We get support whenever we need it. Sometimes they respond immediately and sometimes it will be within 24 hours. We can ask them to please do it right away and they can get a request done within an hour or two."
"The scalability is awesome, because QRadar includes other solutions in the same console."
"A nice benefit is when we go to the process of selecting our youth cases, they go by building blocks. QRadar links it to building blocks."
"The solution's Kusto Query Language (KQL) execution time is pretty good."
"The solution lets us get all the logs properly and regularly monitor customer infrastructure."
"The tool is simple to use."
"Sentinel gave us logs to tell us what's going right and wrong in your environment so we could secure the network."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible log for identifying security threats inside an application. Sentinel is very good at this."
"The native integration with out-of-the box format is hassle free and allows data to be used advantageously."
"It makes everything easier by automating some tasks and growing with our needs."
"The stability is phenomenal and we never had any issues with downtime or even had to restart."
"We have been working with multiple customers, and every time we onboard a customer, we are missing an essential feature that surprisingly doesn't exist in Sentinel. We searched the forums and knowledge bases but couldn't find a solution. When you onboard new customers, you need to enable the data connectors. That part is easy, but you must create rules from scratch for every associated connector. You click "next," "next," "next," and it requires five clicks for each analytical rule. Imagine we have a customer with 150 rules."
"We do see continuous improvement all the time, however, I haven't got a specific feature that is lacking or not well designed."
"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."
"Documentation is the main thing that could be improved. In terms of product usage, the documentation is pretty good, but I'd like a lot more documentation on Kusto Query Language."
"The data connectors for third-party tools could be improved, as some aren't available in Sentinel. They need to be available in the data connector panel."
"Sometimes, we are observing large ingestion delays. We expect logs within 5 minutes, but it takes about 10 to 15 minutes."
"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 playbook is a bit difficult and could be improved."
"QRadar's performance has room for improvement because it cannot handle the volume. I need massive amounts of logs from various devices in our existing network architecture. IBM needs to improve QRadar's capacity to handle more logs."
"I would like the rule creation interface to be much more user-friendly in the next release."
"There needs to be better integration with other applications."
"It doesn't have a SOAR system by default. You need to purchase it additionally, which is the main problem with QRadar."
"I have noticed the interface has room for improvement."
"Technical support could be improved by a bit."
"GUI needs to be improved."
"For the common needs of clients to fulfill requirements, a real integration with Blueworks Live (BPA modeling tool also from IBM) and a more suitable BPM on cloud solution for midsize customers."
"You need a lot of Unix scripting knowledge in order to manage the tool, which is one of the main issues that we faced."
"I would like to see a better reporting work structure on the dashboard."
"Creating a drag-and-drop dashboard or workbook in Sentinel is a little more complex compared to other tools like LogRhythm and IBM QRadar."
"The solution does not allow outsourced authorizations."
"I rate Sentinel a six out of ten for scalability."
"There is no integration in the web-side of the tool."
"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."
"It is an ancient product."
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.