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."We have no complaints about the features or functionality."
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based."
"The initial setup is very simple and straightforward."
"We’ve got process improvement that's happened across multiple different fronts within the organization, within our IT organization based on this tool being in place."
"The solution offers a lot of data on events. It helps us create specific detection strategies."
"The most valuable feature is the onboarding of the workloads. You can see all that has been onboarded in your account on the dashboards."
"We can use Sentinel's playbook to block threats. It covers all of the environment, giving us great visibility."
"The solution has features that helped improve the security posture of our clients. It provides the ability to correlate a large variety of log sources very cost-effectively, especially for Microsoft sources."
"The features that I have found most valuable in QRadar are its data enrichment, use case creations, and adding references - those kinds of features are very good. Also QRadar's event filtration and device integration are perfect."
"I think this is a good product for enterprises because of the performance and out-of-the-box rules and use cases. If they want to reach the maturity level early, they can use these out-of-the-box rules and use cases. That will help them a lot."
"QRadar shows very effective correlations. If you combine all the logins plus user behavior and the current intelligence, it gives a very good correlation for business. I think it reduces the false positives in user activity monitoring because there is a lot of social information to correlate with other data."
"We have worked with other solutions, such as LogRhythm and Splunk. Compared to others, IBM QRadar has the best price-performance ratio so that you are able to reserve minimum costs. It starts settling in fast and gets the first results very quickly. It is also very scalable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is log source management. It enables us to connect to various log sources, including content, authentications, or other customized integrations. These integrations can be tailored for use with other platforms that don’t already have built-in IBM add-ons."
"It provides many options for searching. I can see devices from different vendors, like Cisco, in one interface, which is good for me."
"I think the QDI is very good."
"We run 65 servers globally with just two people: an engineering person and me."
"The solution lets us get all the logs properly and regularly monitor customer infrastructure."
"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."
"Sentinel gave us logs to tell us what's going right and wrong in your environment so we could secure the network."
"The stability is phenomenal and we never had any issues with downtime or even had to restart."
"The most valuable feature of Sentinel is the dashboard."
"The tool is simple to use."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible log for identifying security threats inside an application. Sentinel is very good at this."
"The native integration with out-of-the box format is hassle free and allows data to be used advantageously."
"When it comes to ingesting Azure native log sources, some of the log sources are specific to the subscription, and it is not always very clear."
"If Azure Sentinel had the ability to ingest Azure services from different tenants into another tenant that was hosting Azure Sentinel, and not lose any metadata, that would be a huge benefit to a lot of companies."
"Not all information shows up in Sentinel. Sometimes there are items provided in 365 and if you looked in Sentinel you would not see them and therefore think they do not exist. There can be discrepancies between Microsoft tools."
"We do see continuous improvement all the time, however, I haven't got a specific feature that is lacking or not well designed."
"Microsoft should improve Sentinel, considering that from the legacy systems, it cannot collect logs."
"We're satisfied with the comprehensiveness of the security protection. That said, we do have issues sometimes where there have been global outages and we need to raise a ticket with Microsoft."
"The playbook is a bit difficult and could be improved."
"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..."
"There should be more opportunity for community kind of distribution where, for example, if there was a zero-day threat targeting companies."
"I would like the rule creation interface to be much more user-friendly in the next release."
"I think that the search speed of this solution could be improved."
"There could be improvements made to the UI, the user interface. Though the newer version, 7.3.2, might already have this improvement in place."
"The solution should enhance its capabilities of UEBA and AI/ML tech modeling."
"The solution should include remote action capabilities."
"IBM Security QRadar lacks automated response. With this feature, there's no need to visit VirusTotal or other sites for IP reputation. There should be a small plug-in where users can click to retrieve details about the reputation and organization of public IP."
"The tool is very complicated. One place for improvement would be to have a more user-friendly interface. Having better support in Spanish would be cool."
"This product's connection to certain types of cloud systems could be improved. We can do Microsoft, Google, and Amazon, but there are a lot of other things happening in the cloud that we do not connect well enough to. This product could be improved with better connection to cloud-based solutions."
"The dashboard and customer view should be improved"
"Creating a drag-and-drop dashboard or workbook in Sentinel is a little more complex compared to other tools like LogRhythm and IBM QRadar."
"There is a need for more flexibility in customization, especially when working with different vendors and platforms."
"The solution does not allow outsourced authorizations."
"Log source integration with Sentinel needs to be improved."
"I rate Sentinel a six out of ten for scalability."
"I would like to see a better reporting work structure on the dashboard."
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, Google Chronicle Suite, Wazuh, 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.