Compare Devo vs. Rapid7 InsightIDR

Devo is ranked 14th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 3 reviews while Rapid7 InsightIDR is ranked 7th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 3 reviews. Devo is rated 9.0, while Rapid7 InsightIDR is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Devo writes "Centralizes all our data, enabling us to correlate it and see issues we had never seen before". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rapid7 InsightIDR writes "Users/endpoints focus gives us more understanding of network events, allowing us to see behavior patterns". Devo is most compared with Splunk, LogRhythm NextGen SIEM and IBM QRadar, whereas Rapid7 InsightIDR is most compared with Splunk, Darktrace and AT&T AlienVault USM. See our Devo vs. Rapid7 InsightIDR report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Devo Logo
Read 3 Devo reviews.
2,963 views|1,966 comparisons
Rapid7 InsightIDR Logo
6,573 views|3,081 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Devo vs. Rapid7 InsightIDR and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
406,070 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
Even if it's a relatively technical tool or platform, it's very intuitive and graphical. It's very appealing in terms of the user interface. The UI has a graphically interface with the raw data in a table. The table can be as big as you want it, depending on your use case. You can easily get a report combining your data, along with calculations and graphical dashboards. You don't need a lot of training, because the UI is relatively very intuitive.The user interface is really modern. As an end-user, there are a lot of possibilities to tailor the platform to your needs, and that can be done without needing much support from Devo. It's really flexible and modular. The UI is very clean.One of the biggest features of the UI is that you see the actual code of what you're doing in the graphical user interface, in a little window on the side. Whatever you're doing, you see the code, what's happening. And you can really quickly switch between using the GUI and using the code. That's really useful.Being able to build and modify dashboards on the fly with Activeboards streamlines my analyst time because my analysts aren't doing it across spreadsheets or five different tools to try to build a timeline out themselves. They can just ingest it all, build a timeline out across all the logging, and all the different information sources in one dashboard. So, it's a huge time saver. It also has the accuracy of being able to look at all those data sources in one view. The log analysis, which would take 40 hours, we can probably get through it in about five to eight hours using Devo.

Read more »

The web interface is great — very useful and user-friendly.The incident case management is the most valuable feature. Even though there's always something I find I would like to add to that feature, the ability to quickly sort through all the logs, network and endpoint data, etc., and add it to an incident case as part of the investigation, is nice. Having it automatically timeline that additional data into the original incident timeline, and correlate it to other notable events and activities on the network, results in a huge improvement in our overall confidence that we've quickly traced down the right source of an issue.The alerting to drive investigations and remediation has been its most valuable feature.​It improved my organization by building a security alerting program.

Read more »

Cons
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.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.Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented.

Read more »

The interface for doing investigation needs to be enhanced with minor improvements that would make it more useful.The reporting is the weakest aspect. There needs to be multi-level grouping for events (for example, group by user and destination). Right now, we can do a group by user and a separate table or group by destination. But I'd be more interested in where a person was logging into instead of who was logging in or where he was logging in.Customised alert recipients need to be added to allow better first-line action and quicker response. Configurable honeypots would be a welcome addition.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
We have an OEM agreement with Devo. It is very similar to the standard licensing agreement because we are charged in the same way as any other customer, e.g., we use the backroom.I'm not involved in the financial aspect, but I think the licensing costs are similar to other solutions. If all the solutions have a similar cost, Devo provides more for the money.It's a per gigabyte cost for ingestion of data. For every gigabyte that you ingest, it's whatever you negotiated your price for. Compared to other contracts that we've had for cloud providers, it's significantly less.

Read more »

Licensing is by endpoint and amount of retention time (at least ours is). Default retention was one year, but we are able to push the retention further if needed. There's also a provide-your-own-S3 option for longer retention if you don't want to pay for the additional retention years in your Rapid7 agreement.The pricing and licensing are competitive.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
406,070 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
2,963
Comparisons
1,966
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
2,696
Avg. Rating
9.0
Views
6,573
Comparisons
3,081
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
504
Avg. Rating
9.1
Top Comparisons
Compared 66% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Also Known As
LogtrustInsightIDR
Learn
Devo
Video Not Available
Rapid7
Overview

Devo unlocks the full value of machine data for the world’s most instrumented enterprises by putting more data to work now. With Devo, IT executives finally realize the transformational promise of machine data to drive breakthrough projects that move the entire business forward.

Parsing hundreds of trivial alerts. Managing a mountain of data. Manually forwarding info from your endpoints. Forget that. InsightIDR instantly arms you with the insight you need to make better decisions across the incident detection and response lifecycle, faster.

Offer
See Devo in Action

See how Devo allows you to free yourself from data management, and make machine data and insights accessible.

Learn more about Rapid7 InsightIDR
Sample Customers
NHL, Panda Security, Telefonica, CaixaBank, Public Library of ScienceLiberty Wines, Pioneer Telephone, Visier
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company47%
Comms Service Provider19%
Media Company7%
Wholesaler/Distributor6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company34%
Comms Service Provider10%
Financial Services Firm6%
Manufacturing Company6%
Find out what your peers are saying about Devo vs. Rapid7 InsightIDR and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
406,070 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.