We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The stability is very good."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The visibility it gives you into your infrastructure has been great."
"The correlation and the parsing are important features, since it is very important for a SIEM to have a good scalability and performance."
"What's most valuable in IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is its higher availability than other tools."
"The solution is easy to use, manage, and review all incidents."
"It is a pretty solid product for the type that it is representing. It is a CM solution as compared to Splunk or ArcSight from HP. It is also user friendly. It comes with some internal AI as well, in which it automatically maps multiple lots from unrelated devices and makes a smart decision to link them back and create an offense based on that. It is a smart tool."
"Integrations are quite a useful and key feature of this solution. It has integration with the CVSS score, which is a central point for all the data and scores about the threats. There is an IBM Bluemix dashboard that is integrated with the CVSS score."
"It's built around Red Hat Linux, which is highly robust."
"It's hard for me to pinpoint any one feature that's most valuable because it is all about consuming logs and analyzing them. We started using QRadar UBA because we needed something that could analyze Linux authentication information. Other products take care of the Windows platform."
"Has some great features not available elsewhere."
"The integration with our hypervisor is quite smooth, especially within the Kaspersky Enterprise environment. We have many virtual machines, and the integration is helpful."
"The most valuable feature is endpoint protection."
"This is a feature-rich product."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is a stable solution."
"The most valuable features are the reports."
"EDR's most valuable feature is its basic protection from malware and viruses."
"We have a central console and from there you can monitor all workstations via an agent."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pros →
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The solution is not stable."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"It's resource-intensive."
"From a functionality point of view there are issues sometimes."
"While the interface is easy to use, it could be a little more responsive."
"The solution lacks some maturity."
"The tech support is not that good."
"There should be an extension where we can get the reports. This could be an extension to the dashboard with the Guardian or another product with limited technology, for example IPS. Now, we only have IBM. Basically, it needs more and more integration models."
"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."
"The interface is very old. IBM should remake it into a more modern interface."
"I am not happy with Kaspersky's support since basic support is very cool unless you pay for some advanced support, in which you get better responses and feedback from Kaspersky's team."
"It consumes many system resources."
"There are some issues with EDR's web policy blocking sites that are marked as exceptions."
"The prices can go down a little bit."
"An area for improvement in Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is its technical support because currently, technical support is delayed."
"Documentation needs to be simplified and improved so that it provides good product awareness for end users."
"There's room for improvement in customer service and support. The response time when I open a ticket or communicate with the vendor could be faster."
"The system can be heavy, slowing down performance."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Cons →
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 20th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 198 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is ranked 17th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 44 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert 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 Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert writes "Solid security and performance; overall a useful tool". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is most compared with Trend Vision One, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cynet, Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and Check Point Harmony Endpoint. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert 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.