We performed a comparison between RSA enVision and Splunk Enterprise Security 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."The UI-based analytics are excellent."
"Sentinel has features that have helped improve our security poster. It helped us in going ahead and identifying the gaps via analysis and focusing on the key elements."
"There are some very powerful features to Sentinel, such as the integration of various connectors. We have a lot of departments that use both IaaS and SaaS services, including M365 as well as Azure services. The ability to leverage connectors into these environments allows for large-scale data injection."
"Log aggregation and data connectors are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features are its threat handling and detection. It's a powerful tool because it's based on machine learning and on the behavior of malware."
"The machine learning and artificial intelligence on offer are great."
"Sentinel's most important feature is the ability to centralize all the logs in one place. There's no need to search multiple systems for information."
"The scalability is great. You can put unlimited logs in, as long as you can pay for it. There are commitment tiers, up to six terabytes per day, which is nowhere close to what any one of our customers is running."
"The configuration part is very easy...The technical support was sincere in their responses...I rate the technical support a nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the reporting."
"The most valuable feature is the management features. It's capable of managing large enterprises."
"The logs on the solution are excellent."
"The most valuable feature of Splunk Enterprise Security is website activity monitoring."
"The level of robustness on offer is very good."
"The solution has made us more secure."
"The completeness of the solution is what we like the most."
"Exporting is a good feature. It helps me out when I have to do reports. I do a lot of exporting and crunching of the numbers. Dashboards are okay for showing to the leadership, but for doing statistics and updating tickets, the export feature is very beneficial for me."
"The most valuable feature of Splunk Enterprise Security is the comprehensive logging capabilities it provides."
"Compared to IBM QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security offers faster alert resolution."
"We have been working with multiple customers, and every time we onboard a customer, we are missing an essential feature that surprisingly doesn't exist in Sentinel. We searched the forums and knowledge bases but couldn't find a solution. When you onboard new customers, you need to enable the data connectors. That part is easy, but you must create rules from scratch for every associated connector. You click "next," "next," "next," and it requires five clicks for each analytical rule. Imagine we have a customer with 150 rules."
"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..."
"The solution could improve the playbooks."
"Sentinel still has some anomalies. For example, sometimes when we write a query for log analysis with KQL, it doesn't give us the data in a proper way... Also, the fields or columns could be improved. Sometimes, it is not giving the desired results and there is a blank field."
"If I can use Sentinel offline at home and use it on a local network, it would be great. I'm not sure if I can use Sentinel offline versus the tools I have."
"The troubleshooting has room for improvement."
"In terms of features I would like to see in future releases, I'm interested in a few more use cases around automation. I do believe a lot of automation is available, and more is in progress, but that would be my area of interest."
"Currently, the watchlist feature is being utilized, and although there have been improvements, it is still not fully optimized."
"The integration could be easier, it should support more products."
"In general, the solution currently isn't user-friendly."
"RSA enVision log manager is out of date and is not in use anymore."
"It would be nice if Splunk reduced the cost of training. Their training sessions are way too costly."
"Configuring a few apps is complex, not straightforward."
"Splunk is not very user-friendly. It has a complex architecture in comparison to other solutions on the market."
"It needs more thoroughly tested releases. Every new big version (6, 7, etc.) has had so many bugs that it makes me wary of customers upgrading right away."
"We'd like Splunk to reduce false positives."
"We find that the maintenance process could be a lot better."
"If it could be made available as a service, this would be much better than as a product."
"Certain sections of the developer documentation could use some updating and clarification."
RSA enVision is ranked 36th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 5 reviews while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 1st in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 240 reviews. RSA enVision is rated 6.8, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of RSA enVision writes "Though the solution offers good technical support, it needs to be made more user-friendly ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Splunk Enterprise Security writes "It has a drag-and-drop interface, so you don't need to know SQL or Java to construct a query ". RSA enVision is most compared with NetWitness Platform and IBM Security QRadar, whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security and Datadog. See our RSA enVision vs. Splunk Enterprise Security 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.