We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and LogRhythm SIEM 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. Users praised LogRhythm SIEM for its user-friendly centralized dashboard, strong integration capabilities, and event-filtering capabilities. QRadar stands out with its comprehensive network visibility and strong SIEM capabilities. 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. LogRhythm users requested expanded log storage, better load balancing, and streamlined search capabilities.
Service and Support: Some customers of IBM Security QRadar have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. LogRhythm SIEM was generally praised for its helpful and knowledgeable support, although there have been occasional delays and knowledge problems.
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. Small or medium-sized companies generally find LogRhythm SIEM's setup to be straightforward. However, it is more time-consuming and complex for enterprise deployments involving multiple components or vendors, and users often require assistance from professional services or LogRhythm-certified engineers.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. LogRhythm SIEM’s license typically includes all elements. However, enterprise customers may encounter complexities related to additional features and add-ons.
ROI: IBM Security QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. LogRhythm SIEM has proven to be highly valuable, delivering a significant ROI by reducing the mean time to detect and respond.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer LogRhythm SIEM over IBM QRadar. Users value LogRhythm SIEM for its seamless integration, effective log correlation, and efficient event filtering. LogRhythm SIEM yields a solid return on investment and offers stellar customer service. Customers find LogRhythm SIEM's pricing and licensing competitive, making it a more affordable option for those with budget constraints.
"The most valuable feature is the performance because unlike legacy SIEMs that were on-premises, it does not require as much maintenance."
"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."
"I like the KQL query. It simplifies getting data from the table and seeing the logs. All you need to know are the table names. It's quite easy to build use cases by using KQL."
"Azure Application Gateway makes things a lot easier. You can create dashboards, alert rules, hunting and custom queries, and functions with it."
"The standout feature of Sentinel is that, because it's cloud-based and because it's from Microsoft, it integrates really well with all the other Microsoft products. It's really simple to set up and get going."
"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."
"Another area where it is helping us is in creating a single dashboard for our environment. We can collect all the logs into a log analytics workset and run queries on top of it. We get all the results in the dashboard. Even a layman can understand this stuff. The way Microsoft presents it is really incredible."
"The part that was very unexpected was Sentinel's ability to integrate with Azure Lighthouse, which, as a managed services solution provider, gives us the ability to also manage our customers' Sentinel environments or Sentinel workspaces. It is a big plus for us. With its integration with Lighthouse, we get the ability to monitor multiple workspaces from one portal. A lot of the Microsoft Sentinel workbooks already integrate with that capability, and we save countless amounts of money by simply being able to almost immediately realize multitenant capabilities. That alone is a big plus for us."
"The playbook engine is flexible and allows for the graphical visualization of processes, enabling the implementation of dynamic playbooks for incident response or testing."
"I have found IBM QRadar to be stable."
"It's user-friendly when compared to other products."
"The most valuable features are all the implementations, the plug-ins, and the User Behavior Analytics (UBA)."
"It is really helpful to us from the compliance point of view."
"Providing real-time visibility for threat detection and prioritization - QRadar SIEM provides contextual and actionable surveillance across the entire IT infrastructure."
"The product has plenty of features and capabilities."
"The correlation and the parsing are important features, since it is very important for a SIEM to have a good scalability and performance."
"Compliance reporting is another great feature of this product. It has built in reports right out of the box."
"Currently, we are in the implementation phase. LogRhythm is better than QRadar from the point of view of collecting Windows events. It has a much higher view. You can enable monitoring by default."
"The alarm functions have helped us cut down on the manual work. They bubble things up to us instead of our having to go look for stuff. Also, from an operational perspective, day to day, the Case Management functions are really useful for us. They allow us to track what we see in the incidents that we have."
"What I found most valuable in LogRhythm NextGen SIEM is that it's user-friendly. I also like its dashboard, which shows all the logs and information I want to see."
"AXON has the ability to add and compare use cases."
"The user interface is pretty good compared to other SIEM tools."
"The AI Engine can take an event and correlate it into something else giving us meaningful context regarding what is going on. We integrated it in with our ticketing system, so if an alarm fires, it raises a ticket in our system."
"We use this solution to examine disparate log sources and provide a cohesive method to search for anomalous behavior."
"I can't think of anything other than just getting the name out there. I think a lot of customers don't fully understand the full capabilities of Azure Sentinel yet. It is kind of like when they're first starting to use Azure, it might not be something they first think about. So, they should just kind of get to the point where it is more widely used."
"There are certain delays. For example, if an alert has been rated on Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, it might take up to an hour for that alert to reach Sentinel. This should ideally take no more than one or two seconds."
"Sentinel could improve its ticketing and management. A few customers I have worked with liked to take the data created in Sentinel. You can make some basic efforts around that, but the customers wanted to push it to a third-party system so they could set up a proper ticketing management system, like ServiceNow, Jira, etc."
"The built-in SOAR is not really good out-of-the-box. The SOAR relies on logic apps and you almost need to have some kind of developer background to be able to make these logic apps. Most security people cannot develop anything..."
"The reporting could be more structured."
"Sometimes, we are observing large ingestion delays. We expect logs within 5 minutes, but it takes about 10 to 15 minutes."
"The playbook development environment is not as rich as it should be. There are multiple occasions when we face problems while creating the playbook."
"Add more out-of-the-box connectors with other SaaS platforms/applications."
"Certain updates—especially when using Azure—don't apply directly. Our engineering team must invest additional effort to implement these updates. However, the tool's cloud-based version poses no issues. However, upgrading the product can sometimes be challenging for on-premises instances."
"We sometimes get an error about the hard drive. Approximately once in two months, we can't find the logs, and they go missing, which is a terrible issue. We are getting support for this issue from our support company."
"With IBM Security QRadar, my company faced issues with the support we received for the product."
"There could be better integration with the solution."
"I'd like them to improve the offense. When QRadar detects something, it creates what it calls offenses. So, it has a rudimentary ticketing system inside of it. This is the same interface that was there when I started using it 12 years ago. It just has not been improved. They do allow integration with IBM Resilient, but IBM Resilient is grotesquely expensive. The most effective integration that IBM offers today is with IBM Resilient, which is an instant response platform. It is a very good platform, but it is very expensive. They really should do something with the offense handling because it is very difficult to scale, and it has limitations. The maximum number of offenses that it can carry is 16K. After 16K, you have to flush your offenses out. So, it is all or nothing. You lose all your offenses up until that point in time, and you don't have any history within the offense list of older events. If you're dealing with multiple customers, this becomes problematic. That's why you need to use another product to do the actual ticketing. If you wanted the ticket existence, you would normally interface with ServiceNow, SolarWinds, or some other product like that."
"Integration could be better. They should make it easy to integrate with other solutions."
"Its architecture is very complicated."
"I would suggest QRadar release any documentation or give an online demo, like videos on YouTube. It would increase publicity and public appeal."
"I would like to see case management become more independent from LogRhythm itself."
"The installation was a bit complex because we are running a virtual infrastructure."
"The solution is likely not the best option for a smaller organization."
"I think there is room for improvement because the system is still running on the Windows Server platform. The problem with running on Windows is that it is not that good for scaling and providing for big deployment environments."
"The customer support system is time-consuming."
"It should be improved for automated setup and auto-configuration. There should be ease of integration and ease of setup."
"The console installation is an area with a shortcoming in the solution that needs improvement. If LogRhythm SIEM can offer a web console, it would be great."
"I would like to see APIs well-documented and public facing, so we can get to them all."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while LogRhythm SIEM is ranked 7th in Log Management with 166 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while LogRhythm SIEM is rated 8.4. 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 LogRhythm SIEM writes "The solution reduced our investigation time from days to hours and assists in managing our workflows". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, Elastic Security, Fortinet FortiSIEM and Sentinel, whereas LogRhythm SIEM is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, Fortinet FortiSIEM, LogRhythm Axon and Elastic Security. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. LogRhythm SIEM report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors and best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.
