We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Bitdefender GravityZone EDR 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. Bitdefender GravityZone EDR offers comprehensive detection capabilities and an advanced management interface. It is known for its easy setup, scalability, and reasonable pricing. 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. The reviews suggest that Bitdefender GravityZone EDR can improve by adding a built-in firewall, optimizing deployment, and enhancing encryption.
Service and Support: Some customers of IBM Security QRadar have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. Opinions are divided about Bitdefender's customer service, with some users reporting prompt and helpful assistance and others experiencing responses and an overwhelming amount of emails.
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. Users say Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is straightforward to set up, and deployment can be completed in less than a day.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. Bitdefender GravityZone EDR’s licensing is considered reasonable, and contract lengths are flexible. There may be additional charges for extra features or services.
ROI: IBM Security QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. Bitdefender GravityZone EDR offers varied ROI based on different situations.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer IBM Security QRadar over Bitdefender GravityZone EDR. 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 setup is pretty simple."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The stability is very good."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The tool alerts about lateral internet movements."
"The product is stable. It has a small footprint, but it does a lot of heavy lifting."
"The Ultra is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to whitelist, blacklist, and be very granular as to what I blocked, what apps I blocked, and what websites I block. I think that's probably the most valuable feature."
"We have clients who are also migrating from other anti-virus solutions to GravityZone because of the ease of use, ease of installation and the fact that it can be deployed in the cloud and the same software; you can actually install on other server or workstation. It automatically knows what it's protecting."
"It's hard to pick just one valuable feature as almost all of the main features are very useful. However, the ability to manage it centrally and have detailed control over settings, exceptions and other configurations is extremely beneficial."
"It is easy to scale and it is suitable for organizations from small businesses to enterprise."
"They are constantly updating the solution against malware."
"IBM Security QRadar has significantly improved our incident response procedures."
"We've found the solution to be scalable."
"It has a powerful GUI where you can put together your use cases, and don't have to write your own scripts."
"It protect us from multiple authentication values, unauthorized access and antivirus threats."
"I have found visibility very helpful for analytics."
"Most of our clients are interested in automation. The automation part is good because they are able to detect threats and vulnerabilities in real time. It's very fast."
"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."
"Most of the features are good. It is an excellent solution."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Detections could be improved."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"For many, the problems come mostly when they start tweaking or short-cutting - particularly for patch management."
"Technical support could be faster and more responsive."
"The areas of Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Extended Detection and Response (XDR) could benefit from improvement in terms of how problems are reported and displayed. The way the problems are presented and the information provided could be improved."
"The on-premises setup for Bitdefender sometimes faces issues with connectivity. Management of Windows Defender is a bit easier compared to Bitdefender."
"In terms of improvement of the solution, it could have better features. For example, having a firewall within. This way we would only need one solution."
"This solution would be improved if it included antivirus functionality. You currently need to install a plug-in to Outlook for each email to be scanned."
"The software itself is solid. It would be better if it was more of a real-time solution, like SentinelOne. The one thing that holds me back on the SentinelOne side is that I can blacklist websites and stuff like that, but it's not as granular as Bitdefender. With Bitdefender, I feel like I have more control over what I can whitelist and blacklist."
"The cryptosystem could be improved a bit."
"There is room for improvement in IBM QRadar in integrating features for SOC maturity and security levels directly into QRadar."
"The advanced planning management (APM) features should be included."
"QRadar needs to be more specialized, along the lines of what other SIEM solutions are."
"I would like to see more integration in place after the security lock."
"The quality of technical support depends on the IBM support person. Sometimes, it's hard to get the right person on the other side. A ticket coordinator could be the key to better quality delivery."
"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."
"Technical support is good, but not great."
"QVM is another instance where they need to revise the vulnerability scoring and the proper remediation details."
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is ranked 14th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 55 reviews while IBM Security QRadar is ranked 20th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 198 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is rated 8.6, while IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone EDR writes "High-quality threat intelligence, including encryption and mobile device protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Intercept X Endpoint, whereas IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security. See our Bitdefender GravityZone EDR vs. IBM Security QRadar report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.