We compared IBM Security QRadar and Splunk Enterprise Security across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Ease of Deployment: IBM Security QRadar’s setup can be more challenging and time-consuming compared to Splunk Enterprise Security. Some users found both solutions easy to install, but IBM Security QRadar took several weeks or even months, while Splunk Enterprise Security could be set up in just a day.
Features: IBM Security QRadar is praised for its ability to detect threats and its ease of use. It provides customizable rules, real-time network monitoring, and competitive pricing. Splunk Enterprise Security stands out in its ability to capture and analyze various data streams. It offers valuable features like a search function, session reports, and graphing capabilities.
Room for Improvement: IBM Security QRadar could enhance its pricing, threat identification, plugins, and threat detection, EPS challenge, training, and technical support. Splunk Enterprise Security has room for improvement in its search algorithm, licensing model, technical support, AI capabilities, pricing, and machine learning algorithms.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar’s cost differs based on the organization's requirements and structure. Certain users perceive it as reasonable, while others view it as costly. Similarly, Splunk Enterprise Security's pricing is subjective, as some users find it expensive while others find it reasonable.
ROI: Both Splunk Enterprise Security and IBM Security QRadar are cost-effective solutions with a favorable ROI. QRadar offers user behavior analytics and employee profiling. Splunk enhances security measures and is known for its flexibility and ability to provide global observability.
Service and Support: Both IBM Security QRadar and Splunk Enterprise Security have received varying feedback regarding their customer service and support. Users have commended the staff's expertise and responsiveness for both products. However, there have been complaints about slow response times and a lack of expertise.
Comparison Results: IBM Security QRadar and Splunk Enterprise Security have similarities in terms of setup complexity and value in detection capabilities and user-friendliness. IBM Security QRadar offers a wide range of features, including real network monitoring, security orchestration automated response, and risk scoring for user activity. Splunk Enterprise Security is praised for its search function, session reports, and graphing capabilities, as well as scalability and machine learning capabilities. IBM Security QRadar may have an advantage in features and pricing, while Splunk Enterprise Security may have an advantage in search capabilities and scalability.
"The product can integrate with any device."
"The connectivity and analytics are great."
"The ability of all these solutions to work together natively is essential. We have an Azure subscription, including Log Analytics. This feature automatically acts as one of the security baselines and detects recommendations because it also integrates with Defender. We can pull the sysadmin logs from Azure. It's all seamless and native."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based."
"The most valuable feature is the performance because unlike legacy SIEMs that were on-premises, it does not require as much maintenance."
"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."
"Sentinel has features that have helped improve our security poster. It helped us in going ahead and identifying the gaps via analysis and focusing on the key elements."
"Blocks of predefined conditions can be used to configure detection rules without having to write complicated script."
"On the back-end, Watson helps me figure out an exact problem, sometimes giving me the result."
"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."
"Log correlation is very useful for processing alerts. It serves to follow up alerts in real-time, building an entire workflow."
"It's user-friendly when compared to other products."
"It has improved my efficiency."
"It'll get you from point A to B."
"I think this is a good product for enterprises because of the performance and out-of-the-box rules and use cases. If they want to reach the maturity level early, they can use these out-of-the-box rules and use cases. That will help them a lot."
"The correlation searches are most valuable just because we are able to do things like RBA."
"Positive features include replication capabilities, software development kits, and the architecture."
"The most valuable feature of Splunk is the management and built-in workflows."
"It helps streamline troubleshooting and log analysis."
"We can do things in minutes instead of days."
"What I really like is that even if you have already collected the data, you can extract fields and can build searches."
"Exporting is a good feature. It helps me out when I have to do reports. I do a lot of exporting and crunching of the numbers. Dashboards are okay for showing to the leadership, but for doing statistics and updating tickets, the export feature is very beneficial for me."
"Splunk Enterprise Security is able to process a huge amount of data without any issues."
"If we want to use more features, we have to pay more. There are multiple solutions on the cloud itself, but the pricing model package isn't consistent, which is confusing to clients."
"When it comes to ingesting Azure native log sources, some of the log sources are specific to the subscription, and it is not always very clear."
"It would be good to have some connectors for third-party SIEM solutions. Many customers are struggling with the integration of Azure Sentinel with their on-premise SIEM. Microsoft is changing the log structure many times a year, which can corrupt a custom integration. It would be good to have some connectors developed by Microsoft or supply vendors, but they are not providing such functionality or tools."
"The AI capabilities must be improved."
"The playbook is a bit difficult and could be improved."
"They need to work with other security vendors. For example, we replaced our email gateway with Symantec, but we couldn't collect these logs with Azure Sentinel. Instead of collecting these logs with Azure Sentinel, we are collecting them on Qradar. We couldn't do it with Sentinel, which is a problem for us."
"If I see an alert and I want to drill down and get more details about the alert, it's not just one click. In other SIEM tools, you just have to click the IP address of the entity and they give you the complete picture. In Sentinel, you have to write queries or use saved queries to get details."
"Not all information shows up in Sentinel. Sometimes there are items provided in 365 and if you looked in Sentinel you would not see them and therefore think they do not exist. There can be discrepancies between Microsoft tools."
"We sometimes get an error about the hard drive. Approximately once in two months, we can't find the logs, and they go missing, which is a terrible issue. We are getting support for this issue from our support company."
"QRadar needs to be improved on the storage side, particularly when the disc exceeded the maximum threshold."
"The architecture could be improved. I got stuck for a long time trying to understand the architecture, as it is quite challenging."
"The solution is clunky."
"There could be improvements made to the UI, the user interface. Though the newer version, 7.3.2, might already have this improvement in place."
"There needs to be better integration with other applications."
"AI is superb but need improvements."
"The user interface is a bit difficult to get used to."
"I would like some additional AI capabilities to provide additional information about things going wrong and things going well."
"Splunk is very expensive. The license is based on the volume of the logs ingested. I was responsible for managing the contract with our service integrator. I don't know the precise details of the competing solution, but I have heard that Splunk is more expensive than others. I don't know what the going rate is on the market, but I think there are at least two competitors that are less expensive. We have experienced a few issues with our service providers in terms of log filtering and ingestion, so we continue to pay a bit more per day for our logs."
"I would like to get visibility into the data pipelines on heavy forwarders and indexers to see exactly their source and the cause of saturation when it occurs. This would help us learn even more about our high use applications."
"We do have to educate developers on how to not blow it up. It is a little to easy to write an expensive query and overly stress the system. This could be improved."
"Some of the terminology can be confusing, even for seasoned vets. Renaming components at this point would be a serious undertaking. However, it might be beneficial in the long run."
"Some of the search functions can be better. There has been a lot of talk at the conference about the update of SPL before each iteration. That will be a lot of help."
"Its pricing is extremely high. There are other tools out in the market that are competitive. They do not necessarily have all the functionality, but they are competitive. The professional services we have used have been high as well in comparison to the market."
"The GUI could be improved to include some of the capabilities that other BI solutions have. The layout is a little restrictive where you can’t resize all the panels to exactly how you would like them without tweaking some XML code."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 1st in Log Management with 228 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. 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 Splunk Enterprise Security writes "It has a drag-and-drop interface, so you don't need to know SQL or Java to construct a query ". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security, Fortinet FortiSIEM and Sentinel, whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, Elastic Security, Azure Monitor and Datadog. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Splunk Enterprise Security report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors and best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Log Management 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.
For tools I’d recommend:
-SIEM- LogRhythm
-SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR
Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is asking to miss details that are critical, and ending up a statistic.
Also, remember that any EDR/XDR should integrate to the SIEM/SOAR and a strong threat intel source.
If you consider SOC outsourcing take your time and find one you can integrate like a virtual team member. They are only as good as their depth of knowledge in your business and your on-prem SOC.
Apache Metron, ELK, OSSIM, Splunk and Qradar (in cost/benefit order for starters).
I have no experience with Rapid 7 or InsightIDR.
IBM Qradar works great but is not easy to install. If it is running it is a great tool. Also depending on the budget, Riverbed security is a tool to consider. Costs are lower than QRadar and easier to implement.
Or you can use our SaaS solution with QRadar and a lot more built-in. One holistic solution for your complete IT environment.
@Evgeny Belenky, I found Stellar to be quite intriguing.
I would also recommend McAFee’s new console for centralizing and coordinating a well-deployed enterprise solution.
COMODO MDR
Disclaimer: ICE Consulting offers SOC as a Service to our Clients.
For SOC Tools we use Securonix and other in-house developed solutions. Securonix provides an all in one package (SIEM, UEBS, & NTA) that we believe is competitively priced for the Small to Mid Market. Their Customer Service seems better than most and they are always highly rated in the Gartner MQ reports. Set-up is not difficult, but is time consuming for the first time, afterwards each client deployment we have added has seemed to get easier and quicker.
Please contact several vendors and ask for demos, talk with the vendor engineers to ensure the solution will workfor your needs... We evaluated Rapid7, AlienVault (ATT Cybersecurity), QRadar, LogRythm, and Securonix before deciding on Securonix.
Also take your time in evaluating and re-evaluating the products, I took us about about 18 months and over $30K of working with what was utimately the wrong product for us, before moving to Securonix.
Make sure training for the use of the service is included. We have been able to provide entensive training to out team through the vendor and would not have been able to get out SOC offering off the ground without it.
Good Luck!
COMODO SOC covers your entire network and also your email. It is very easy to deploy and is very effective for reports.
I prefer the COMODO SOC solution because it is a very good and easy to deploy product.