We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Sentinel based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There are a lot of things you can explore as a user. You can even go and actively hunt for threats. You can go on the offensive rather than on the defensive."
"The most valuable feature is the alert notifications, which are categorized by severity levels: informational, low, medium, and high."
"You can fine-tune the SOAR and you'll be charged only when your playbooks are triggered. That is the beauty of the solution because the SOAR is the costliest component in the market today... but with Sentinel it is upside-down: the SOAR is the lowest-hanging fruit. It's the least costly and it delivers more value to the customer."
"Sentinel improved how we investigate incidents. We can create watchlists and update them to align with the latest threat intelligence. The information Microsoft provides enables us to understand thoroughly and improve as we go along. It allows us to provide monthly reports to our clients on their security posture."
"The dashboard that allows me to view all the incidents is the most valuable feature."
"I like the ability to run custom KQL queries. I don't know if that feature is specific to Sentinel. As far as I know, they are using technology built into Azure's Log Analytics app. Sentinel integrates with that, and we use this functionality heavily."
"The analytic rule is the most valuable feature."
"Native integration with Microsoft security products or other Microsoft software is also crucial. For example, we can integrate Sentinel with Office 365 with one click. Other integrations aren't as easy. Sometimes, we have to do it manually."
"What I like about IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is that it uses machine learning algorithms to generate risk scoring for the user activity. I also like that it syncs with our Active Directory users, so it really has full coverage for all users in our environment."
"Search capabilities are sufficient for most tasks."
"It showed us where weaknesses were in our environment, so we could actively target those patches first."
"The most valuable feature is the machine learning module."
"I have found its network traffic log, network bit log, and QBI most valuable."
"I have found visibility very helpful for analytics."
"IBM has everything you need in a cybersecurity solution. If you want to build a cybersecurity operation center version then I think QRadar is a perfect solution."
"The support is very good. We get support whenever we need it. Sometimes they respond immediately and sometimes it will be within 24 hours. We can ask them to please do it right away and they can get a request done within an hour or two."
"The solution's Kusto Query Language (KQL) execution time is pretty good."
"Sentinel gave us logs to tell us what's going right and wrong in your environment so we could secure the network."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it provides a central locking system for many event sources."
"The solution lets us get all the logs properly and regularly monitor customer infrastructure."
"The most valuable feature of Sentinel is the dashboard."
"It makes everything easier by automating some tasks and growing with our needs."
"One of the most valuable features is the business intelligence engine. It's very important because it keeps track of everything that's happening and alerts us if something is different than expected. The first time I used it, I was shocked at how well it performed. Another valuable feature that I think makes this product worth the price you pay for it is that it connects to basically every system that provides some form of logging, and it's very easy to set up what triggers this."
"The native integration with out-of-the box format is hassle free and allows data to be used advantageously."
"The solution could improve the playbooks."
"The on-prem log sources still require a lot of development."
"Some of the data connectors are outdated, at least the ones that utilize Linux machines for log forwarding. I believe that Microsoft is already working on improving this."
"The solution should allow for a streamlined CI/CD procedure."
"Microsoft Sentinel should provide an alternative query language to KQL for users who lack KQL expertise."
"When we pass KPIs to the governance department, there's no option to provide rights to the data or dashboard to colleagues. We can use Power BI for this, but it isn't easy or convenient. They should just come up with a way to provide limited role-based access to auditing personnel"
"The dashboards can be improved. Creating dashboards is very easy, but the visualizations are not as good as Microsoft Power BI. People who are using Microsoft Power BI do not like Sentinel's dashboards."
"I think the number one area of improvement for Sentinel would be the cost."
"Whenever we are upgrading or installing any type of patch, at that time we have some delays."
"There is a shortage of skilled individuals with knowledge about the solution. There is training required."
"SOAR is what is expected the most from QRadar. They have something called SOAR Resilient, and it would be great if that gets induced in SIEM. IBM QRadar (as well as McAfee ESM) should have analytics platform integration. Currently, SIEMs don't have full-fledged integration with analytics where we are able to dump our data in SIEM, and the same data can be called from different analytics applications. We should be able to bring this data to a platform like Hadoop for big data and run the analytics there. Currently, people are seeing the past data and taking some actions in the present, but when it comes to analytics, there should be futuristic data where you can predict something out of your present and past data. Apart from that, I would like to see a full-fledged ITSM tool in QRadar. It sometimes has some technical issues that need to be checked. It requires a dedicated QRadar engineer to completely manage it. It has different module sets, such as event collector and event processor, and some technical glitches come in between. It takes the log but doesn't exactly process it in the way we want."
"A lot of information that we receive for the devices is IP-based, but it would help if we could have a default dashboard in which we can add more details about the assets for which we are receiving the information. For example, if it is a Windows or Linux device, we only get the IP for that particular device. We don't really get the name and other details of that particular device. For that, you have to drill down into your own asset management system. It would be good to have a place where we can probably add this information so that we don't have to look into other tools."
"Some UI enhancements would be nice, such as exporting custom event properties and the ability to export rules."
"There is a lot of manual configuration required in order for the product to run smoothly, and I think that it could be made more automatic."
"There are a lot of things they are working on and a lot of technologies that are not yet there. They should probably work out a better reserve with their ecosystem of business partners and create wider and more in-depth qualities, third-party tools, and add-ons. These things really give immediate business value. For instance, there are many limitations in using SAP, EBS, or Micro-Dynamics. A lot of things that are happening in those platforms could also be monitored and allowed from the cybersecurity risks perspective. IBM might be leaving this gap or empty space for business partners. Some larger organizations might already be doing this. It would be very nice if IBM can make some artificial intelligence part free of charge for all current QRadar users. This would be a big advantage as compared to other competitors. There are companies that are going in different directions. Of course, you can't do everything inside QRadar. In general, it might be very good for all players to provide more use cases, especially regarding data protection and leakage prevention. There are some who are already doing some kind of file integrity or gathering some more information from all possible technologies for building anything related to the user and data analysis, content analysis, and management regarding the data protection."
"With IBM Security QRadar, my company faced issues with the support we received for the product."
"I would like to see a better reporting work structure on the dashboard."
"It is an ancient product."
"I rate Sentinel a six out of ten for scalability."
"The dashboard and customer view should be improved"
"There is a need for more flexibility in customization, especially when working with different vendors and platforms."
"You need a lot of Unix scripting knowledge in order to manage the tool, which is one of the main issues that we faced."
"The solution does not allow outsourced authorizations."
"Log source integration with Sentinel needs to be improved."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while Sentinel is ranked 17th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 16 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Sentinel is rated 7.6. 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 Sentinel writes "An automated solution that helped me detect threats in less than half the time it used to take". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and ArcSight Logger, whereas Sentinel is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, Google Chronicle Suite, LogRhythm SIEM and ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM). See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Sentinel 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.