We performed a comparison between Devo and Securonix Next-Gen SIEM based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Devo users praised the solution’s ability to ingest and store data in its original format and multi-tenancy feature. They also liked Devo’s community-driven content and code-based approach. Securonix Next-Gen SIEM offers multiple advanced features, such as Spotter for in-depth search and analysis and extensive customization options. 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. Securonix users highlighted the need for greater flexibility in modifying reports and templates and improved analytics and visualization.
Service and Support: Devo customers value their collaborative approach, responsiveness, and strong partnerships. Customers appreciate the ease of working with Devo and trust their support team. Securonix has been praised for its effective support and timely problem resolution.
Ease of Deployment: 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. Some users found the Securonix Next-Gen SIEM setup to be straightforward, but others found it complex.
Pricing: Devo's pricing is considered fair and competitive with no hidden costs. However, reviewers recommend that Devo's pricing tiers should offer more flexibility. Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is competitively priced and more affordable than many SIEM solutions.
ROI: Devo offers a substantial return on investment thanks to the solution’s superior data ingestion, scalability, and cost savings. Users say Securonix Next-Gen SIEM offers a significant return on investment by streamlining infrastructure management and enhancing overall efficiency.
"What is most useful, is that it has a good connection to the Microsoft ecosystem, and I think that's the key part."
"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."
"It is quite efficient. It helps our clients in identifying their security issues and respond quickly. Our clients want to automate incident response and all those things."
"Native integration with Microsoft security products or other Microsoft software is also crucial. For example, we can integrate Sentinel with Office 365 with one click. Other integrations aren't as easy. Sometimes, we have to do it manually."
"The Log analytics are useful."
"You can fine-tune the SOAR and you'll be charged only when your playbooks are triggered. That is the beauty of the solution because the SOAR is the costliest component in the market today... but with Sentinel it is upside-down: the SOAR is the lowest-hanging fruit. It's the least costly and it delivers more value to the customer."
"The analytics has a lot of advantages because there are 300 default use cases for rules and we can modify them per our environment. We can create other rules as well. Analytics is a useful feature."
"The most valuable feature is the alert notifications, which are categorized by severity levels: informational, low, medium, and high."
"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."
"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."
"Devo has a really good website for creating custom configurations."
"The real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"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."
"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."
"The ability to have high performance, high-speed search capability is incredibly important for us. When it comes to doing security analysis, you don't want to be doing is sitting around waiting to get data back while an attacker is sitting on a network, actively attacking it. You need to be able to answer questions quickly. If I see an indicator of attack, I need to be able to rapidly pivot and find data, then analyze it and find more data to answer more questions. You need to be able to do that quickly. If I'm sitting around just waiting to get my first response, then it ends up moving too slow to keep up with the attacker. Devo's speed and performance allows us to query in real-time and keep up with what is actually happening on the network, then respond effectively to events."
"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"There aren't any positive aspects of the solution. It was a complete failure. There are no redeeming features."
"Its console is very easy to use and configure. It is very intuitive for our use cases. App integrations are also pretty nice."
"Risk scoring was nice. We could exactly see which user had the highest risk score, and then we could pick it up and work on it."
"I rate the technical support a nine out of ten. They're friendly. Whenever we have a P1 issue, we write an email and our issue is resolved in one or two hours."
"The UEBA functionality indicates a lot about behaviors that are not found through a traditional SIEM. We have exploited that more than anything since we started using it."
"One of the most valuable features is the integration of all types of data sources to extract relevant information regarding events. It is a good solution when it comes to the correlations that it makes within all the data handled in our company."
"The second feature is that within the SNYPR product there is a functionality called Spotter. We use that for link analysis diagrams and to run the stats command. That's extremely useful because it replaces a tedious, manual process we used to use, using Microsoft Excel and a couple of other methods, to bring data together."
"The solution is stable and scalable."
"The on-prem log sources still require a lot of development."
"We're satisfied with the comprehensiveness of the security protection. That said, we do have issues sometimes where there have been global outages and we need to raise a ticket with Microsoft."
"They only classify alerts into three categories: high, medium, and low. So, from the user's point of view, having another critical category would be awesome."
"Sentinel's reporting is complex and can be more user-friendly."
"The KQL query does not function effectively with Windows 11 machines, and in the majority of machine-based investigations, KQL queries are essential for organizing the data during investigations."
"The troubleshooting has room for improvement."
"The solution should allow for a streamlined CI/CD procedure."
"Azure Sentinel will be directly competing with tools such as Splunk or Qradar. These are very established kinds of a product that have been around for the last seven, eight years or more."
"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."
"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."
"Some of the documentation could be improved a little bit. A lot of times it doesn't go as deep into some of the critical issues you might run into. They've been really good to shore us up with support, but some of the documentation could be a little bit better."
"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."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"There are some issues from an availability and functionality standpoint, meaning the tool is somewhat slow. There were some slow response periods over the past six to nine months, though it has yet to impact us terribly as we are a relatively small shop. We've noticed it, however, so Devo could improve the responsiveness."
"Where Devo has room for improvement is the data ingestion and parsing. We tend to have to work with the Devo support team to bring on and ingest new sources of data."
"The solution could provide more automation."
"The analytics-driven approach for finding sophisticated threats and reducing false positives is positive and good, but the platform requires a more dynamic concept. Everything is a bit static."
"We would like a little more face-to-face training. Securonix has several tutorials on its website, but we want there to be a person in Colombia who does training or workshops to give us a better understanding of the platform."
"When they did upgrades or applied patches, sometimes, there was downtime, which required the backfill of data. There were times when we had to reach out and get a lot of things validated."
"It seems to me that within Securonix there is no option for completely visualizing the types of sources or if there is any loss of logs. I've heard that they have an additional module to validate those types of cases, but in terms of the platform itself only, I can only see how often it sends data but not any specific detail."
"Parsing needs to be improved. Every time we integrate a new, specific data source, we face a lot of problems in parsing, even for the old data source."
"It takes too long to generate Spotter reports. For example, a 90-day report is around 100 megabytes. That takes a while, but a one-day report can be generated in a few seconds. We would be happy if they sped up the process."
"We would like to see better integration with other products."
Devo is ranked 13th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 21 reviews while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 7th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 27 reviews. Devo is rated 8.4, while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is rated 8.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Securonix Next-Gen SIEM writes "Spotter tool has helped us eliminate many hours required to manually create link analysis diagrams". Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and ArcSight Logger, whereas Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, LogRhythm SIEM, Exabeam Fusion SIEM and USM Anywhere. See our Devo vs. Securonix Next-Gen SIEM 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.
