We compared IBM Security QRadar and Microsoft Sentinel based on our users' reviews across several parameters.
IBM Security QRadar is praised for its advanced threat detection, customizable dashboards, and integration capabilities, while users mention concerns about its complex interface and lack of flexibility. Microsoft Sentinel is highlighted for its affordability, intuitive interface, and automation options, with users mentioning the need for improved customization and integration features. Users find value in both products, with IBM Security QRadar focusing on comprehensive features and advanced threat detection, while Microsoft Sentinel offers affordability and streamlined incident response capabilities.
Features: IBM Security QRadar excels in customizable dashboards and seamless integration with security tools, offering real-time threat detection. Microsoft Sentinel stands out for its advanced threat visibility and streamlined incident response with machine learning capabilities.
Pricing and ROI: IBM Security QRadar has a higher setup cost, with some users mentioning the need for experienced personnel. Licensing is seen as complex but offers flexibility. Microsoft Sentinel has affordable, minimal setup costs and flexible, easy-to-understand licensing options. With comprehensive features and an intuitive interface, IBM Security QRadar offers great value in detecting and managing threats. Users highlighted its ability to streamline operations and improve security posture. Microsoft Sentinel users also praised its positive impact on organizations, noting benefits like improved security, reduced incident response time, and enhanced threat visibility. Despite some initial setup complexities, they appreciate its ease of use and integration with other Microsoft products.
Room for Improvement: IBM Security QRadar could improve user interface intuitiveness, performance speed, customization flexibility, and support resources. Microsoft Sentinel users seek better platform usability, customization options, integration with other tools, enhanced reporting, and improved documentation.
Deployment and customer support: Users found IBM Security QRadar quicker to deploy and set up compared to Microsoft Sentinel, which, although quicker to deploy, had a more complex setup process, according to some users. IBM Security QRadar's highly knowledgeable and responsive customer service provides prompt assistance. Microsoft Sentinel's customer service is praised for its effectiveness and quick issue resolution, creating positive user experiences.
The summary above is based on 144 interviews we conducted recently with IBM Security QRadar and Microsoft Sentinel users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"We get events and make the correlation, or rules. In IBM, we can implement our customer's rules. We can have very clear status threats and severity of antigens."
"It is really helpful to us from the compliance point of view."
"The flexibility is good in terms of pulling log files."
"The playbook engine is flexible and allows for the graphical visualization of processes, enabling the implementation of dynamic playbooks for incident response or testing."
"It has a good integration with the artificial intelligence engine of Watson."
"The solution can scale."
"It has a lot of good correlation rules. From a customer's point of view, it is one of the best solutions because you don't need to create correlation rules from scratch. You just review them and customize them as you want."
"What's most valuable in IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is its higher availability than other tools."
"Sentinel has features that have helped improve our security poster. It helped us in going ahead and identifying the gaps via analysis and focusing on the key elements."
"The data connectors that Microsoft Sentinel provides are easy to integrate when we work with a Microsoft agent."
"I like the unified security console. You can close incidents using Sentinel in all other Microsoft Security portals, when it comes to incident response."
"It's easy to use. It's a very good product. It can easily ingest data from anywhere. It has an easily understandable language to perform actions."
"The most valuable features are its threat handling and detection. It's a powerful tool because it's based on machine learning and on the behavior of malware."
"The analytic rule is the most valuable feature."
"The machine learning and artificial intelligence on offer are great."
"Sentinel also enables you to ingest data from your entire ecosystem and not just from the Microsoft ecosystem. It can receive data from third-party vendors' products such firewalls, network devices, and antivirus solutions. It's not only a Microsoft solution, it's for everything."
"There is a lot of manual configuration required in order for the product to run smoothly, and I think that it could be made more automatic."
"From a functionality point of view there are issues sometimes."
"QRadar needs to be improved on the storage side, particularly when the disc exceeded the maximum threshold."
"The quoting and the dashboard session could be improved. It should be more user-friendly."
"The price of IBM Security QRadar is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The product can be a bit complex."
"The solution is expensive compared to other products."
"There is a shortage of skilled individuals with knowledge about the solution. There is training required."
"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."
"Add more out-of-the-box connectors with other SaaS platforms/applications."
"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."
"I would like Microsoft Sentinel to enhance its SOAR capabilities."
"There is room for improvement in entity behavior and the integration site."
"The following would be a challenge for any product in the market, but we have some in-house apps in our environment... our apps were built with different parameters and the APIs for them are not present in Sentinel. We are working with Microsoft to build those custom APIs that we require. That is currently in progress."
"One key area that can be improved is by building a strong integration with our XDR platform."
"It would be good to have some connectors for third-party SIEM solutions. Many customers are struggling with the integration of Azure Sentinel with their on-premise SIEM. Microsoft is changing the log structure many times a year, which can corrupt a custom integration. It would be good to have some connectors developed by Microsoft or supply vendors, but they are not providing such functionality or tools."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while Microsoft Sentinel is ranked 2nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 86 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Sentinel is rated 8.2. 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 Microsoft Sentinel writes "Gives a comprehensive and holistic view of the ecosystem and improves visibility and the ability to respond". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Sentinel, whereas Microsoft Sentinel is most compared with AWS Security Hub, Wazuh, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Elastic Security and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Microsoft Sentinel report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors and best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) 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.