We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Microsoft ATA [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Splunk, Rapid7 and others in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA)."The support is very good. We get support whenever we need it. Sometimes they respond immediately and sometimes it will be within 24 hours. We can ask them to please do it right away and they can get a request done within an hour or two."
"It is suitable for large companies with critical infrastructure. For our clients, robustness, availability at a high level, and the level of references and experiences connected to the solution are important."
"Most of the features are good. It is an excellent solution."
"The most valuable feature is the machine learning module."
"The scalability is awesome, because QRadar includes other solutions in the same console."
"This solution has excellent security analytics."
"The flexibility is good in terms of pulling log files."
"It's built around Red Hat Linux, which is highly robust."
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"The solution works well when used with other Microsoft solutions."
"One of the most valuable features is the ability to report on questionable activity."
"The implementation and configuration are not easy."
"There is one problem with QRadar in regards to the add-on apps. The apps can be frustrating. For example, when I add a big app like one of the add-ons for resiliency, add-on applications for QRadar, these applications require different hardware to implement and to deploy. The resiliency connector because there's a considerable amount of data scanning, operates for these apps correctly."
"The technical support can be improved a little bit, and the price could be cheaper."
"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."
"You can scale IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics, but it has room for improvement."
"I would like to see some artificial intelligence and alternative solutions."
"The solution should include remote action capabilities."
"QVM is another instance where they need to revise the vulnerability scoring and the proper remediation details."
"There are occasions where it generates some false positives and you have to embark into figuring it out. You need to find out if it was a true alert or a false positive. It's a little bit cumbersome in that area."
"It would be ideal if the interface allowed for more granular configurations. For example, if I were to set a rule that is a deviation from the pre-defined rules in the Microsoft product, there's conflict."
"Some of the newer features are not completely there yet... For example, there's a tool that allows you to grade your overall internal security and I don't feel that it's completely accurate."
Earn 20 points
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 1st in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) with 198 reviews while Microsoft ATA [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA). IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Microsoft ATA [EOL] is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft ATA [EOL] writes "Easy to define rules but interface needs better granularity and only integrates well with other Microsoft solutions". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas Microsoft ATA [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) vendors.
We monitor all User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) 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.