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 most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The stability is very good."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"I think the QDI is very good."
"The scalability is very good. It's not a problem."
"The detection rate is good and the false positive rate is low."
"It is suitable for large companies with critical infrastructure. For our clients, robustness, availability at a high level, and the level of references and experiences connected to the solution are important."
"It helps us discover any threats with their alerts and tracking."
"It has a lot of good correlation rules. From a customer's point of view, it is one of the best solutions because you don't need to create correlation rules from scratch. You just review them and customize them as you want."
"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."
"It'll get you from point A to B."
"It is an AI technology because it is using machine learning technology. So far, there is nothing better out there for UEBA in terms of monitoring endpoints and user activity. It is using machine learning language, so it is right at the top. It provides that capability and monitors all the activities. It devises a baseline and monitors if there is any deviation from the baseline."
"The integration is very user-friendly. There are not many CLI commands. Everything is directly accessible from the web interface."
"They basically charge you in a better way."
"The solution offers excellent reporting features. Our customers have been satisfied that they have been able to meet their compliance needs by giving them a standard report."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"The main advantage of Logpoint is the support service. They reply within ten minutes to an hour to our queries."
"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 most valuable aspect is the combination of the software and the support that they have."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"I don't look at only the features and benefits; I also look at the price. It is a bit expensive when compared with other solutions. It is expensive for specific deployment topologies, and the decision-makers go for alternatives like ArcSight. It should also have more AI features or capabilities for better threat intelligence. The more it uses machine learning, the better would be the dashboard, analytics, and other things."
"Do your research before implementing it, because it is tough to implement."
"I think that the search speed of this solution could be improved."
"IBM technical support is always terrible."
"There are areas in IBM Security QRadar that could benefit from improvement. Its ability to customize knowledge for specific purposes could be enhanced. Also, it lacks clarity in presenting details. It is also difficult to see the reports."
"The released patch quality is poor. IBM should test those patches on their side, not on the client's side."
"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."
"The threat detection needs improvement, they have many false positives."
"One of the things we faced last year was that we had some memory issues with the server running. We were running them as virtual services, and we were facing some performance issues. Back then, there were some things that had already been solved at the end, but one of the small issues we had was that it was quite memory-consuming. After one upgrade that we did, we faced some performance issues."
"It is a good product, but its interface or GUI could be better."
"The solution should offer more integrations and third-party solutions like incident response platforms or allow access to third-party big data"
"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."
"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."
"In terms of functionality, it is very good. The only issue is the documentation. Its documentation should be improved."
"Sometimes, the product is not stable."
"Log management could be better because transporting the log from a password to the client system takes time."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while Logpoint is ranked 26th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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 Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, 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 Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors, best Log Management vendors, and best User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) 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.