We performed a comparison between ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) and Devo based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager is praised for its well-designed dashboard, real-time reporting, and threat intelligence capabilities that leverage AI and correlation tools. Users also like ArcSight’s seamless integration and effortless management. Devo users praised the solution’s ability to ingest and store data in its original format and multi-tenancy feature. Devo’s community-driven content and code-based approach earned positive comments. ArcSight ESM users have recommended improvements in training, speed, and data administration, while Devo could benefit from improved workflow integration and search features. Users say Devo’s agents could handle Windows event logs better, and the solution should overhaul its basic reporting mechanisms.
Service and Support: Some ArcSight ESM users have found the support to be responsive and helpful, while others have faced issues with slow response times and a lack of expertise. Devo customers value their collaborative approach, responsiveness, and strong partnerships. Customers appreciate the ease of working with Devo and trust their support team.
Ease of Deployment: Some said that ArcSight ESM is straightforward to set up, while others noted that integration with other systems can be challenging and requires specialized knowledge. Devo's initial setup was deemed manageable, with users praising the ease of data onboarding as well as the availability of professional services and training.
Pricing: Users consider the pricing of ArcSight ESM to be reasonable and affordable. Devo's pricing is considered fair and competitive with no hidden costs. However, reviewers recommend that Devo's pricing tiers should offer more flexibility.
ROI: ArcSight ESM delivers an ROI by helping clients achieve compliance objectives and prevent incidents. Devo offers a substantial return on investment thanks to the solution’s superior data ingestion, scalability, and cost savings.
"Having your logs put all in one place with machine learning working on those logs is a good feature. I don't need to start thinking, "Where are my logs?" My logs are in a centralized repository, like Log Analytics, which is why you can't use Sentinel without Log Analytics. Having all those logs in one place is an advantage."
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based."
"Previously, it was a little bit difficult to find where an incident came from, including which IP address and which country. So in Sentinel, it's very easy to find where the incident came from since we can easily get the information from the dashboard, after which we take action quickly."
"In Azure Sentinel, we have found, they do have a store in their capability. AI and intelligence features. We found that to be very helpful for us because some other things we do need to integrate again or find another vendor for the store"
"Investigations are something really remarkable. We can drill down right to the raw logs by running different queries and getting those on the console itself."
"The UI of Sentinel is very good and easy to use, even for beginners."
"The UI-based analytics are excellent."
"It's easy to use. It's a very good product. It can easily ingest data from anywhere. It has an easily understandable language to perform actions."
"The product is quite mature. It's been around for a long time."
"The tool is good for correlation and aggregation. We use it as a collection platform."
"There are many features that are good for clients who are looking for a good SIEM solution. They like the ease of creating a business that is effective and impressive."
"It prevented my users from getting infected by ransomware. It can also pinpoint the story behind every virus or network attack to our environment."
"ArcSight ESM allows us to find if someone is doing an administrative operation at inappropriate times of day or trying to do something they're not allowed to."
"I would rate the ease of use for new users an eight out of ten, with ten being easy to use. It is a good tool."
"Usability is the most valuable feature. The accessibility is quite good."
"I think that the overall experience with this solution is good, but in particular, I think that the dashboards are quite interactive."
"The strength of Devo is not only in that it is pretty intuitive, but it gives you the flexibility and creativity to merge feeds. The prime examples would be using the synthesis or union tables that give you phenomenal capabilities... The ability to use a synthesis or union table to combine all those feeds and make heads or tails of what's going on, and link it to go down a thread, is functionality that I hadn't seen before."
"In traditional BI solutions, you need to wait a lot of time to have the ability to create visualizations with the data and to do searches. With this kind of platform, you have that information in real-time."
"Scalability is one of Devo's strengths."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the ability that Devo has to ingest data. From the previous SIEM that I came from and helped my company administer, it really was the type of system where data was parsed on ingest. This meant that if you didn't build the parser efficiently or correctly, sometimes that would bring the system to its knees. You'd have a backlog of processing the logs as it was ingesting them."
"Devo has a really good website for creating custom configurations."
"It's very, very versatile."
"The querying and the log-retention capabilities are pretty powerful. Those provide some of the biggest value-add for us."
"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"The on-prem log sources still require a lot of development."
"Sentinel's reporting is complex and can be more user-friendly."
"The AI capabilities must be improved."
"Only one thing is missing: NDR is not available out-of-the-box. The competitive cloud-native SIEM providers have the NDR component. Currently, Sentinel needs NDR to be powered from either Corelight or some other NDR provider."
"The interface could be more user-friendly. It''s a small improvement that they could make if they wanted to."
"We've seen delays in getting the logs from third-party solutions and sometimes Microsoft products as well. It would be helpful if Microsoft created a list of the delays. That would make things more transparent for customers."
"The solution could improve the playbooks."
"Given that I am in the small business space, I wish they would make it easier to operate Sentinel without being a Sentinel expert. Examples of things that could be easier are creating alerts and automations from scratch and designing workbooks."
"It is quite complex and could use a better UI. So the improvement would be a simplification. It is pretty complicated to use. The architecture is not complex but the setup and use are."
"The initial setup could be more straightforward."
"In other products, I have found that they use some kind of GUI that is drag and drop. While in ArcSight they use still scripting. They should keep scripting because some people prefer scripting but they should have the option for those who prefer using drag and drop."
"Administration of ArcSight is not an easy job. The admin needs to be well experienced in it to identify the root cause and fix it."
"They should try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the SIEM tool."
"ArcSight ESM is not easy to use and it should be integrated with other tools that have infrastructure capabilities."
"The roadmap is not clear."
"In certain cases, this product does have false positives, which the company should work on."
"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"The overall performance of extraction could be a lot faster, but that's a common problem in this space in general. Also, the stock or default alerting and detecting options could definitely be broader and more all-encompassing. The fact that they're not is why we had to write all our own alerts."
"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."
"An admin who is trying to audit user activity usually cannot go beyond a day in the UI. I would like to have access to pages and pages of that data, going back as far as the storage we have, so I could look at every command or search or deletion or anything that a user has run. As an admin, that would really help. Going back just a day in the UI is not going to help, and that means I have to find a different way to do that."
"The Activeboards feature is not as mature regarding the look and feel. Its functionality is mature, but the look and feel is not there. For example, if you have some data sets and are trying to get some graphics, you cannot change anything. There's just one format for the graphics. You cannot change the size of the font, the font itself, etc."
"The biggest area with room for improvement in Devo is the Security Operations module that just isn't there yet. That goes back to building out how they're going to do content and larger correlation and aggregation of data across multiple things, as well as natively ingesting CTI to create rule sets."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
More ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is ranked 12th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 93 reviews while Devo is ranked 13th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 21 reviews. ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is rated 7.8, while Devo is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) writes "Allows for monitoring logs according to industry standards within ESM but has a total capacity capped at 12 TB, limiting real-time data retention periods". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Devo writes "Keeps 400 days of hot data, covers our cloud products, and has a high ingestion rate and super easy log integrations". ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, ArcSight Intelligence, Trellix ESM, IBM Security QRadar and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response, whereas Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Sumo Logic Security. See our ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) vs. Devo 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.
