Most Helpful Review
Researched IBM QRadar but chose Devo: Having the ability to do real-time analytics drives down attacker dwell time
Researched IBM QRadar but chose Securonix Security Analytics: Analytics platform has open security data-links and it is easy to deploy
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM QRadar vs. Securonix Security Analytics and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
455,536 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"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 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 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 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."
"The ability to add extensions is the most valuable feature. For example, extensions that provide valuable test ports."
"It's quite scalable. We have upgraded some solutions from 1000 APS up to 3500 APS to 5000 APS. It's a good solution, they have no scalability issues."
"IBM has everything you need in a cybersecurity solution. If you want to build a cybersecurity operation center version then I think QRadar is a perfect solution."
"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."
"Most of our clients are interested in automation. The automation part is good because they are able to detect threats and vulnerabilities in real time. It's very fast."
"The stability is good."
"The scalability is good."
"It helps us discover any threats with their alerts and tracking."
"What I like most is that the threat models and risk scoring are very accurate and very helpful to the analysts on my team. They help highlight the most important things for them to look at."
"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 customizability of the tool is valuable. We are able to customize the use cases and create them easily without a large amount of Securonix assistance. It's very flexible. We do not have to rely on Professional Services to modify or create a new use case."
"The feature that is most valuable is the fact that it's an open platform, so it allows us to modify policies and tune policies as needed. There's also a feature called Data Insights which allows us to create different dashboards on specific things of interest for us."
"The machine-learning algorithms are the most valuable feature because they're able to identify the 'needle in the haystack.'"
"When we were looking for products for our security monitoring needs, our biggest requirement was that we wanted something based on machine-learning and analytics. If you go with rules, it can raise a lot of noise. Securonix, with its UEBA capability, had the best analytics use-cases."
"One of the most valuable features it has is the thread chaining. One of the common issues that we always had was the number of anomalies that we used to get and the number of alerts that we used to get. But with this approach of thread chaining, we've found the false-positive rate has decreased very significantly. That was something that we never could have achieved before."
"The most valuable feature is being able to look at users' behavioral profiles to see what they typically access. One of the key events that we monitor is people's downloading of objects... It's very easy to see people's patterns, what they typically do."
"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."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the ability to parse different log types. The breadth of overall log parsers that exists right now is an area that they could improve. Natively, there's more that could be done by Devo then what it can and can't understand from a parsing perspective."
"Devo has a lot of cloud connectors, but they need to do a little bit of work there. They've got good integrations with the public cloud, but there are a lot of cloud SaaS systems that they still need to work with on integrations, such as Salesforce and other SaaS providers where we need to get access logs."
"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 technical support is not good. We opened a lot of cases and from my experience, they are not complicated issues but it takes forever to get an answer."
"I would like for them to develop a detection management solution. It does not have a detecting management solution in it, you have to buy it as it is, on top of the extended solution."
"They should provide more manual examples online so that I can learn it myself."
"I think QRadar is very complex. It's a distributed system and IBM QRadar has an all-in-one solution which is not like that distributed solution but it's a good product. IBM needs to consider the user interface because if we compare it with AlienVault, the AlienVault user interface is fantastic but the IBM QRadar user interface is very complex. They should focus on how to make it easier for the client."
"Before we didn't have any security issues but recently a few of the user emails were hacked. We had to actually recreate their emails for them."
"The API integration for AD is a problem when it comes to vulnerability management. If you want to incorporate multiple factor authentication it becomes a problem with the AD. It doesn't integrate well. That needs to be improved."
"I would suggest QRadar release any documentation or give an online demo, like videos on YouTube. It would increase publicity and public appeal."
"The only challenge is that IBM has been a closed enterprise. It should be more open to integrating with other providers at an enterprise level. We're a bank and the core banking system integration is not way straightforward and there is no integration between IBM and these products. If IBM could open up and provide a way of integrating it seamlessly, without charging more for it, that would make a big difference."
"A helpful feature would be an event export. A way to create more substantial summary reports would be nice."
"Other than issues with the training, there have been issues with the encryption. There have also been issues with some of the reporting, minor glitches that they have fixed as they've gone along."
"Securonix implements risk scores based on different policies that are triggered. We've seen some challenges with the risk scores and how they trigger. These are things that Securonix has recognized and they've been working with us to help improve things."
"There is room for improvement in the product's integration with ServiceNow and in the reporting features."
"We have compliance needs. We have investigation needs. And we have situations where an analyst needs to look at threats. These three things require a different view of how they look at the threats. What would be good is to have Securonix create three different views of their Security Command Center so that, depending on the persona of the person logging in, they'd get the relevant data they need and not see everything."
"One of the things they can improve on a little bit is the usability side, to make some things simpler... The tool does have a lot of knobs, you can turn a lot of things on and off and you can change things. Sometimes, it can become a little overwhelming. They should remove some confirmation options and make it simpler for the less mature customers and people who are still trying to grasp it."
"We have a lot of users who, because they're engineers and they're bringing down product data - where, at times, a top-level product could be 10,000 or 15,000 objects - it's difficult for us to determine what should be a concern and what shouldn't be a concern. We work with the Securonix folks to try to come up with better ways to identify that."
"The pricing. I'm not sure how they are proceeding with the identity based pricing compared with DB pricing which most of the vendors are using today."
Pricing and Cost Advice
"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."
"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."
"We have seen ROI. We have seen cost savings in maintenance, upkeep, and support."
"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 is cheaper than ArcSight."
"It's too expensive."
"Licensing is very expensive, IBM QRadar is a very expensive solution. If you want to minimize costs then IBM QRadar is not for you."
"The pricing is good."
"I would like for them to lower the price."
"IBM has subscriptions plans that run for one year."
"QRadar is quite expensive. It wouldn't be worth it for a small business..."
"It's too expensive. The licensing is also a little bit difficult to understand because you have to license it per event and per number of flows."
"We have an annual license. We pay $200,000 for the base licensing and we pay another $50,000 for the software as a service."
"A good thing about Securonix is that they don't charge by volume of data or number of devices... They charge by the number of employees, which is a much more predictable number for me, versus data. Our costs are in the $100,000 range over a three-year subscription."
"We have a license from our 5.0, so that license just continued. We paid them the extra cloud-hosting costs for a year which were about $300,000."
"We went in on a three-year agreement which has an annual licensing fee, based upon the number of people that we're monitoring. There have not been any additional costs to the standard licensing fees."
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Even if it's a relatively technical tool or platform, it's very intuitive and graphical. It's very appealing in terms of… more »
Top Answer: We have an OEM agreement with Devo. It is very similar to the standard licensing agreement because we are charged in the… more »
Top Answer: It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendlier… more »
Top Answer: In my market, a lot of financial companies had or have an ArcSight installation. Just because in former times it was… more »
Top Answer: I was looking for software as a service rather than having issues with managing hardware, upgrades, updates. I was… more »
Top Answer: There is slight room for improvement in terms of the initial deployment. What I see is that Securonix is more focused on… more »
Compared 54% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Also Known As
|Logtrust||QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, QRadar||Securonix|
Devo, the cloud-native logging and security analytics company, empowers security and operations teams to maximize the value of all their data. Only the Devo platform delivers the powerful combination of real-time visibility, high-performance analytics, scalability, multitenancy, and low TCO crucial for monitoring and securing business operations as enterprises accelerate their shift to the cloud.
The IBM QRadar security and analytics platform is a lead offering in IBM Security's portfolio. This family of products provides consolidated flexible architecture for security teams to quickly adopt log management, SIEM, user behavior analytics, incident forensics, and threat intelligence and more. As an integrated analytics platform, QRadar streamlines critical capabilities into a common workflow, with tools such as the IBM Security App Exchange ecosystem and Watson for Cyber Security cognitive capability.
With QRadar, you can decrease your overall cost of ownership with an improved detection of threats and enjoy the flexibility of on-premise or cloud deployment, and optional managed security monitoring services.
SNYPR is a next-generation security analytics platform that transforms big data into actionable security intelligence. Built on a Hadoop big data security lake, SNYPR combines an open data model, log management, security incident and event management (SIEM), user and entity behavior analytics (UEBA) and fraud detection into a complete, end-to-end platform that can be deployed in its entirety or in flexible, modular components.
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 IBM QRadar
Learn more about Securonix Security Analytics
|United States Air Force, Rubrik, Critical Start, NHL, Panda Security, Telefonica, CaixaBank, OpenText||Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.||Dtex SystemsPfizerWestern UnionHarrisITG|
Computer Software Company27%
Comms Service Provider24%
Financial Services Firm6%
Financial Services Firm26%
Comms Service Provider7%
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider24%
Financial Services Firm5%
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm6%
IBM QRadar is ranked 2nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 39 reviews while Securonix Security Analytics is ranked 3rd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 10 reviews. IBM QRadar is rated 8.0, while Securonix Security Analytics is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM QRadar writes "Best price-performance ratio, good scalability, and easy to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Securonix Security Analytics writes "Spotter tool has helped us eliminate many hours required to manually create link analysis diagrams". IBM QRadar is most compared with Splunk, ELK Logstash, LogRhythm NextGen SIEM, ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) and NetIQ Sentinel, whereas Securonix Security Analytics is most compared with Splunk, Exabeam, LogRhythm NextGen SIEM, Splunk User Behavior Analytics and Rapid7 InsightIDR. See our IBM QRadar vs. Securonix Security Analytics 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.