We performed a comparison between Devo and Fortinet FortiSIEM based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Devo users praised the solution’s ability to ingest and store data in its original format and multi-tenancy feature. They also liked Devo’s community-driven content and code-based approach. Fortinet FortiSIEM is praised for its advanced agents and effective correlation capabilities. Reviews say FortiSIEM excels at anomaly reporting and threat hunting. Devo could benefit from improved workflow integration and search features. Devo’s agents could handle Windows event logs better, and the solution should overhaul its basic reporting mechanisms. Fortinet FortiSIEM would benefit from better integration guides, more flexible reporting, and reduced resource consumption. Users also suggest adding more AI capabilities and improving database monitoring.
Service and Support: Devo customers value their collaborative approach, responsiveness, and strong partnerships. Customers appreciate the ease of working with Devo and trust their support team. Some FortiSIEM customers consider Fortinet support to be satisfactory and efficient, while others were unhappy and thought the engineers could be more knowledgeable.
Ease of Deployment: Devo's initial setup was deemed manageable, with users praising the ease of data onboarding as well as the availability of professional services and training. Some FortiSIEM users found it effortless to install within a day or two. Nonetheless, others encountered difficulties regarding CPU and memory requirements, as well as a lengthier deployment time.
Pricing: Devo's pricing is considered fair and competitive with no hidden costs. However, reviewers recommend that Devo's pricing tiers should offer more flexibility. FortiSIEM is generally regarded as reasonably priced and competitive. However, FortiSIEM may still be deemed costly in developing markets.
ROI: Devo offers a substantial return on investment thanks to the solution’s superior data ingestion, scalability, and cost savings. Fortinet FortiSIEM has consistently delivered a positive return on investment for businesses.
"The log query feature has been the most valuable because it's very good. You can put your data on the cloud and run queues from Sentinel. It will do it all very fast. I love that I don't have to upload it to an Excel file and then manually look for a piece of information. Sentinel is much faster and is good for big databases."
"The solution offers a lot of data on events. It helps us create specific detection strategies."
"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."
"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 Identity Behavior tab furnishes us with the entire history linked to each IP or domain that has either accessed or attempted to access our system."
"The analytic rule is the most valuable feature."
"We can use Sentinel's playbook to block threats. It covers all of the environment, giving us great visibility."
"The most valuable feature is the UEBA. It's very easy for a security operations analyst. It has a one-touch analysis where you can search for a particular entity, and you can get a complete overview of that entity or user."
"The most useful feature for us, because of some of the issues we had previously, was the simplicity of log integrations. It's much easier with this platform to integrate log sources that might not have standard logging and things like that."
"The real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"The strength of Devo is not only in that it is pretty intuitive, but it gives you the flexibility and creativity to merge feeds. The prime examples would be using the synthesis or union tables that give you phenomenal capabilities... The ability to use a synthesis or union table to combine all those feeds and make heads or tails of what's going on, and link it to go down a thread, is functionality that I hadn't seen before."
"In traditional BI solutions, you need to wait a lot of time to have the ability to create visualizations with the data and to do searches. With this kind of platform, you have that information in real-time."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the ability that Devo has to ingest data. From the previous SIEM that I came from and helped my company administer, it really was the type of system where data was parsed on ingest. This meant that if you didn't build the parser efficiently or correctly, sometimes that would bring the system to its knees. You'd have a backlog of processing the logs as it was ingesting them."
"The querying and the log-retention capabilities are pretty powerful. Those provide some of the biggest value-add for us."
"The thing that Devo does better than other solutions is to give me the ability to write queries that look at multiple data sources and run fast. Most SIEMs don't do that. And I can do that by creating entity-based queries. Let's say I have a table which has Okta, a table which has G Suite, a table which has endpoint telemetry, and I have a table which has DNS telemetry. I can write a query that says, 'Join all these things together on IP, and where the IP matches in all these tables, return to me that subset of data, within these time windows.' I can break it down that way."
"Scalability is one of Devo's strengths."
"The CMDB and the device discovery features are most valuable."
"Easy alert setup which enables different alerts in different categories."
"To add workers and even collectors is pretty easy."
"I like the various options, including the option for CMDB and the easier access to create rules, playbooks, or use cases. It's also easier to use for creating dashboards and reports."
"Our customer did not have security monitoring in the first place. With this solution, it provided security posture management and visibility about the security landscape and threats that they had."
"FortiSIEM's log correlation is good."
"Technical support is helpful."
"We like the integration of all of these Fortinet platforms together. Everything is integrated well, and we are able to sell that as a service to our customers."
"If their UI was a bit more streamlined and easy to find when I need it, then that would be a great improvement."
"Sentinel's reporting is complex and can be more user-friendly."
"In terms of features I would like to see in future releases, I'm interested in a few more use cases around automation. I do believe a lot of automation is available, and more is in progress, but that would be my area of interest."
"They should just add more and more out-of-the-box connectors. It is quite a new product, and it has a lot of connectors, and even more would be good."
"It could have a better API to be able to automate many things more extensively and get more extensive data and more expensive deployment possibilities. It can gain some points on the automation part and the integration part. The API is very limited, and I would like to see it extended a bit more."
"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."
"The AI capabilities must be improved."
"They only classify alerts into three categories: high, medium, and low. So, from the user's point of view, having another critical category would be awesome."
"Where Devo has room for improvement is the data ingestion and parsing. We tend to have to work with the Devo support team to bring on and ingest new sources of data."
"Some third-parties don't have specific API connectors built, so we had to work with Devo to get the logs and parse the data using custom parsers, rather than an out-of-the-box solution."
"There is room for improvement in the ability to parse different log types. I would go as far as to say the product is deficient in its ability to parse multiple, different log types, including logs from major vendors that are supported by competitors. Additionally, the time that it takes to turn around a supported parser for customers and common log source types, which are generally accepted standards in the industry, is not acceptable. This has impacted customer onboarding and customer relationships for us on multiple fronts."
"I would like to have the ability to create more complex dashboards."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
"Some basic reporting mechanisms have room for improvement. Customers can do analysis by building Activeboards, Devo’s name for interactive dashboards. This capability is quite nice, but it is not a reporting engine. Devo does provide mechanisms to allow third-party tools to query data via their API, which is great. However, a lot of folks like or want a reporting engine, per se, and Devo simply doesn't have that. This may or may not be by design."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
"There are some issues from an availability and functionality standpoint, meaning the tool is somewhat slow. There were some slow response periods over the past six to nine months, though it has yet to impact us terribly as we are a relatively small shop. We've noticed it, however, so Devo could improve the responsiveness."
"Does not have load-sharing or high-availability, and these are important things to implement. I can do the same things in another way, but not naturally having these features makes it complicated."
"I would like to see more integration with other platforms."
"Customer support service could be better."
"Creating parsers to try make unknown events or currently unsupported devices produce meaningful information is extremely cumbersome."
"The performance can be improved. Sometimes it takes a long time to fetch data."
"Our customers are noticing configuration available in the GUI interface and I think that they should be equal."
"The dashboards need to be improved. It gives you so much detail, but sometimes too much detail, especially to an executive, it's too much."
"Their product support, in general, is not that great. The product support is in the same ecosystem. Their support is improving but it's not that great.vvv"
Devo is ranked 13th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 21 reviews while Fortinet FortiSIEM is ranked 9th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 64 reviews. Devo is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiSIEM is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Devo writes "Keeps 400 days of hot data, covers our cloud products, and has a high ingestion rate and super easy log integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSIEM writes "It's cheaper than other solutions with the same features but lacks integration with many third-party vendors". Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, LogRhythm SIEM and Wazuh, whereas Fortinet FortiSIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and ThousandEyes. See our Devo vs. Fortinet FortiSIEM 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.
