We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and LogPoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: 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. LogPoint is noted for its advanced technology and extensive log-collection, parsing, and analysis mechanisms. 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. Reviews suggest LogPoint should improve its dashboard customization, resource efficiency, network hierarchy diagrams, and agent deployment.
Service and Support: Some QRadar customers have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. LogPoint's customer service receives high marks for its exceptional technical support and responsive engineers, but some users reported delays in receiving help from higher-level support.
Ease of Deployment: QRadar's initial setup can be complex for users without expertise, and the difficulty may vary depending on the size of the data set. The complexity of LogPoint's initial setup can range from complex and time-consuming to fast and easy, depending on the user's experience and the organization’s size.
Pricing: QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. LogPoint's fixed pricing model is seen as cost-effective and competitive.
ROI: QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. LogPoint makes costs more predictable and enables companies to generate revenue through security operation services.
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"The stability is very good."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The flexibility is good in terms of pulling log files."
"The most valuable features of IBM Security QRadar are flexibility, IBM support, and scalability."
"It allows us to search data both on-premises and on the cloud."
"On the back-end, Watson helps me figure out an exact problem, sometimes giving me the result."
"The QNI feature is the one I am very interested in, and I have also been interested in Watson. From the log analysis and the security perspective, we are able to dive deep into any of the logs and anomalies."
"The product has plenty of features and capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is user behavior analytics (UBA)."
"It has improved my efficiency."
"What I like best about LogPoint is its cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions. LogPoint also has better dashboards which I find valuable. I also like that you can create use cases based on your assets."
"The solution's user interface is quite simple, and the integration is better than other products."
"The integration is very user-friendly. There are not many CLI commands. Everything is directly accessible from the web interface."
"The flexibility of the search feature and the solution's analytics features are the most valuable parts of the solution."
"The most valuable feature of LogPoint is that they have the SIEM and SOAR combined in one solution. They are not on a separate platform."
"The product is easy to use."
"Technical support is responsive and very friendly."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"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."
"The support needs improvement."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"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."
"The solution is not stable."
"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 for Yara to be supported by all components."
"The initial setup was complex, and it took six months."
"The solution is clunky."
"The biggest problem was built on top of the QRadar in the executive operations center network. The integration was not using the network security specialist properly, and all the incidents were inferior with QRadar. Its compatibility is not really good."
"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."
"Pricing model could be more cost-effective."
"The reporting system could use some upgrading."
"Needs better visualization options beyond the time series charts and a few other options that they have."
"The thing that makes it a little bit challenging is when you run into a situation where you have logs that are not easily parsable. If a log has a very specific structure, it is very easy to parse and create a parser for it, but if a log has a free form, meaning that it is of any length or it can change at any time, handling such a log is very challenging, not just in LogPoint but also in everything else. Everybody struggles with that scenario, and LogPoint is also in the same boat. One-third of logs are of free form or not of a specific length, and you can run into situations where it is almost impossible to parse the log, even if they try to help you. It is just the nature of the beast."
"The general public wasn't looking for that type of product unless you had a company that was medical or financial and needed 24-hour responsiveness."
"Logpoint is not flexible. Its documentation is not user-friendly."
"I know that they have user behavior analytics, but it's an extra cost for this feature. It would be nice if it was in with the standard products."
"In terms of functionality, it is very good. The only issue is the documentation. Its documentation should be improved."
"It is a good product, but its interface or GUI could be better."
"Sometimes, the product is not stable."
"The interface needs things like wizards that will assist with creating complex correlation rules."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while Logpoint is ranked 29th in Log Management with 20 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Logpoint is rated 7.4. 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 Logpoint writes "Good technical support but it is complex to use and resource-heavy". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas Logpoint is most compared with Elastic Security, Rapid7 InsightIDR, Microsoft Sentinel, Wazuh and LogRhythm SIEM. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Logpoint report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors, best User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) vendors, and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.