We performed a comparison between Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and IBM Security QRadar based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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 main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The stability is very good."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"It has improved my efficiency."
"We can easily monitor many things using this tool."
"Network-Based Anomaly Detection (NBAD): Using NetFlow, JFlow, SFlow, or QFlow (all 7 layers), offenses are detected as a response when a rule is triggered."
"It is a very good SIEM."
"I have found its network traffic log, network bit log, and QBI most valuable."
"This is a good tool to have because it gives you the ability to track what is currently happening in your environment."
"The interface is good."
"It comes with many rules disabled. You can tune them and modify them according to your enterprise needs and avoid false positives."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"QRadar needs to be improved on the storage side, particularly when the disc exceeded the maximum threshold."
"Technical support is good, but not great."
"It would be good if the program allowed certain profiles to only see certain customer information."
"Technical support could be improved by a bit."
"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 dashboard and reports are not user-friendly or efficient so are of little help with threat hunting activity."
"The dashboard is pathetic and it takes a long time to perform a search."
"In terms of additional features, a mobile app would be nice. Also, the reporting is definitely okay, but you have to make sure that everybody with different roles can understand it. There is room for improvement in the reporting."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 37th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 19 reviews while IBM Security QRadar is ranked 20th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 198 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Darktrace and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security. See our Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. IBM Security QRadar report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.