Associate Director Security at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
2023-09-11T09:17:00Z
Sep 11, 2023
It's relatively on the pricier side, but when compared to other solutions. It's not the most budget-friendly option, but it can be considered somewhat more cost-effective in comparison to other alternatives. I would rate it a seven.
Head of ICT Security & Governance at a construction company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
2023-05-29T11:46:00Z
May 29, 2023
The upfront pricing model that we have would have been more beneficial if it had been a recurring license fee, but that wasn't a massive issue for us. It's fairly priced.
Cybersecurity Consultant at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Consultant
Top 20
2023-03-07T08:55:00Z
Mar 7, 2023
It is an expensive solution, but it's not the most expensive we've seen. We also know how much we're going to pay, unlike with some other providers where all of a sudden our license explodes. We will probably need to deploy over a thousand physical sensors. This means that the cost will automatically go up to millions. They do not sell the smallest sensors that they had in the past, which we would be glad to have right now.
CyberOps at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
2023-03-07T08:51:00Z
Mar 7, 2023
It's a bit expensive, as you can have a lot of different solutions for free. So, in the beginning, it's more expensive, but as time passes it gets better.
Vectra's pricing is too high. All schools will not be able to afford it. Vectra will only end up targeting higher education and higher value independence purely because of the price. A lot of schools would love to have a product like Vectra AI, but they simply can't because they struggle to even pay the high E5 licensing from Microsoft. When you're up against that, Vectra AI is never going to be within the sector's price range.
Security at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 20
2023-03-06T10:54:00Z
Mar 6, 2023
From a licensing perspective, the Vectra detect platform is pretty doable. Also, the hardware prices are nothing that we're not used to. The stream part is a little overpriced compared to the detect part. The reason is that you need to stream data to detect events anyway, so the data is in there. The only thing that's not available is the UI to be able to look at the stream data, which is also on the appliances but is just not activated. That's mainly the thing that we want to improve on.
My company pays for the Vectra AI licensing fee yearly. I know the figure because my company recently renewed the license, and it's okay, at least for the financial sector.
Sr. Specialist - Enterprise Security at a mining and metals company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
2022-10-06T18:19:00Z
Oct 6, 2022
Vectra is a bit on the higher side in terms of price, but they have always been transparent. The reason that they are this good is that they invest, so they need to charge accordingly. They are above average when it comes to price. They're not very economical but it's for a good reason. As long as we get quality, we are okay with paying the extra amount.
Senior Security Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2021-07-01T16:53:00Z
Jul 1, 2021
Their licensing model is antiquated. I'm not a fan of their licensing model. We have to pay for licensing based on four different things. You have to pay based on the number of unique IPs, the number of logs that we send through Recall and Stream, and the size of our environment. They need to simplify their licensing down to just one thing. It should be based on the amount of data, the number of devices, or something else, but there should be just one thing for everything. That's what they need to base their licensing on. Cost-wise, they're not cheap. They were definitely the most expensive option, but you get what you pay for. They're not the cheapest option. I know that their prices scared away a couple of people who have demoed it in the past. Once they got their quote, they were like, "Well, see you later. We can't do this." So, that is an area that they come up short against other people.
Head of Information Security at Winterflood Securities
Real User
2021-05-19T13:11:00Z
May 19, 2021
Pricing is comfortable. I have no issues with the pricing structure at the moment. There are no additional costs that I'm aware of unless you layer on MSP, additional soft services, or professional services. But for the solution itself, I don't believe there are.
Head of Information Security at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-07-26T08:19:00Z
Jul 26, 2020
They compare very favorably against the competition in terms of price. Nothing in this area is cheap. There is a lot of value in the products that you're buying, but they have come in at the right price for us in comparison to others. I would say that they're competitive in their pricing.
Information Technology Security Engineer II at a mining and metals company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2020-05-28T06:26:00Z
May 28, 2020
I don't really have anything to compare it to, but I would assume the pricing is fair. I believe they are licensing current devices or hosts. When I was last talking to a rep, we were having to go through a true-up process, but that hasn't started yet.
Global Security Operations Manager at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
2020-02-25T06:59:00Z
Feb 25, 2020
At the time of purchase, we found the pricing acceptable. We had an urgency to get something in place because we had a minor breach that occurred at the tail end of 2016 to the beginning of 2017. This indicated we had a lack of ability to detect things on the network. Hence, why we moved quickly to get into the tool in place. We found things like Bitcoin mining and botnets which we closed quickly. In that regard, it was worth the money. Three years later, the license is now due for renewal so we will need to review it and see how competitive it is versus other solutions. When we implemented the physical sensors, there were costs for support in terms of detection review sessions. We had a monthly session where an analyst would talk through the content, types of detections that they were seeing, etc. We have a desire to increase our use. However, it all comes down to budget. It's a very expensive tool that is very difficult to prove business support for. We would like to have two separate networks. We have our corporate network and PCI network, which is segregated due to payment processing. We don't have it for deployed in the PCI network. It would be good to have it fully deployed there to provide us with additional monitoring and control, but the cost associated with their licensing model makes it prohibitively expensive to deploy.
Cyber Security Analyst at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-01-12T07:22:00Z
Jan 12, 2020
The license is based on the concurrent IP addresses that it's investigating. We have 9,800 to 10,000 IP addresses. There are additional features that can be purchased in addition to the standard licensing fee, such as Cognito Recall and Stream. We have purchased these, but have not implemented them yet. They are part of the licensing agreement.
Head of Information Security at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-01-05T07:29:00Z
Jan 5, 2020
We are running at about 90,000 pounds per year. The solution is a licensed cost. The hardware that they gave us was pretty much next to nothing. It is the license that we're paying for. I think if we outgrow our current hardware, then we will have a look at bigger hardware or some sort of distribution. I'm sure they have a number of different options for larger companies. I don't see that being a major issue for us in the next three to five years. We don't have complete visibility because we don't have all of that metadata surrounding it. Sometimes there might be more metadata before, it might be something afterwards, or there might be something missing, but we accept that because we don't have the funds to pay for the additional functionality that it can provide its a trade off.
Vectra threat detection and response is a complete cybersecurity platform that collects, detects, and prioritizes security alerts. The Cognito platform for Network Detection and Response (NDR) detects and responds to attacks inside cloud, data center, Internet of Things, and enterprise networks. The platform also provides automated response capabilities for low-level threats and escalates more severe anomalies to security personnel.
Cognito captures data for multiple relevant sources and...
It's relatively on the pricier side, but when compared to other solutions. It's not the most budget-friendly option, but it can be considered somewhat more cost-effective in comparison to other alternatives. I would rate it a seven.
The solution is low-cost and affordable.
The upfront pricing model that we have would have been more beneficial if it had been a recurring license fee, but that wasn't a massive issue for us. It's fairly priced.
It is an expensive solution, but it's not the most expensive we've seen. We also know how much we're going to pay, unlike with some other providers where all of a sudden our license explodes. We will probably need to deploy over a thousand physical sensors. This means that the cost will automatically go up to millions. They do not sell the smallest sensors that they had in the past, which we would be glad to have right now.
The pricing and licensing are quite straightforward because they're based on IP licenses. As a result, they are easy to count.
It's a bit expensive, as you can have a lot of different solutions for free. So, in the beginning, it's more expensive, but as time passes it gets better.
Vectra's pricing is too high. All schools will not be able to afford it. Vectra will only end up targeting higher education and higher value independence purely because of the price. A lot of schools would love to have a product like Vectra AI, but they simply can't because they struggle to even pay the high E5 licensing from Microsoft. When you're up against that, Vectra AI is never going to be within the sector's price range.
Vectra AI is not a cheap solution.
I think the pricing structure is good compared to other products. The price is not too high and it's not too low. It is perfect.
As far as pricing goes, my only reference point is Darktrace. Their pricing is pretty even, which is a fair price.
From a licensing perspective, the Vectra detect platform is pretty doable. Also, the hardware prices are nothing that we're not used to. The stream part is a little overpriced compared to the detect part. The reason is that you need to stream data to detect events anyway, so the data is in there. The only thing that's not available is the UI to be able to look at the stream data, which is also on the appliances but is just not activated. That's mainly the thing that we want to improve on.
Its cost is too much. It's an investment that we can afford. It's a lot, but it's worth it.
My company pays for the Vectra AI licensing fee yearly. I know the figure because my company recently renewed the license, and it's okay, at least for the financial sector.
Vectra is a bit on the higher side in terms of price, but they have always been transparent. The reason that they are this good is that they invest, so they need to charge accordingly. They are above average when it comes to price. They're not very economical but it's for a good reason. As long as we get quality, we are okay with paying the extra amount.
Cost is a big factor, as always. However, I think we have a very good price–performance ratio.
Their licensing model is antiquated. I'm not a fan of their licensing model. We have to pay for licensing based on four different things. You have to pay based on the number of unique IPs, the number of logs that we send through Recall and Stream, and the size of our environment. They need to simplify their licensing down to just one thing. It should be based on the amount of data, the number of devices, or something else, but there should be just one thing for everything. That's what they need to base their licensing on. Cost-wise, they're not cheap. They were definitely the most expensive option, but you get what you pay for. They're not the cheapest option. I know that their prices scared away a couple of people who have demoed it in the past. Once they got their quote, they were like, "Well, see you later. We can't do this." So, that is an area that they come up short against other people.
Pricing is comfortable. I have no issues with the pricing structure at the moment. There are no additional costs that I'm aware of unless you layer on MSP, additional soft services, or professional services. But for the solution itself, I don't believe there are.
The pricing is high. Darktrace was also pricey.
The pricing is very good. It's less expensive than many of the tools out there.
They compare very favorably against the competition in terms of price. Nothing in this area is cheap. There is a lot of value in the products that you're buying, but they have come in at the right price for us in comparison to others. I would say that they're competitive in their pricing.
I don't really have anything to compare it to, but I would assume the pricing is fair. I believe they are licensing current devices or hosts. When I was last talking to a rep, we were having to go through a true-up process, but that hasn't started yet.
We have a one-year subscription that covers support and everything. There is no other overhead.
At the time of purchase, we found the pricing acceptable. We had an urgency to get something in place because we had a minor breach that occurred at the tail end of 2016 to the beginning of 2017. This indicated we had a lack of ability to detect things on the network. Hence, why we moved quickly to get into the tool in place. We found things like Bitcoin mining and botnets which we closed quickly. In that regard, it was worth the money. Three years later, the license is now due for renewal so we will need to review it and see how competitive it is versus other solutions. When we implemented the physical sensors, there were costs for support in terms of detection review sessions. We had a monthly session where an analyst would talk through the content, types of detections that they were seeing, etc. We have a desire to increase our use. However, it all comes down to budget. It's a very expensive tool that is very difficult to prove business support for. We would like to have two separate networks. We have our corporate network and PCI network, which is segregated due to payment processing. We don't have it for deployed in the PCI network. It would be good to have it fully deployed there to provide us with additional monitoring and control, but the cost associated with their licensing model makes it prohibitively expensive to deploy.
The license is based on the concurrent IP addresses that it's investigating. We have 9,800 to 10,000 IP addresses. There are additional features that can be purchased in addition to the standard licensing fee, such as Cognito Recall and Stream. We have purchased these, but have not implemented them yet. They are part of the licensing agreement.
We are running at about 90,000 pounds per year. The solution is a licensed cost. The hardware that they gave us was pretty much next to nothing. It is the license that we're paying for. I think if we outgrow our current hardware, then we will have a look at bigger hardware or some sort of distribution. I'm sure they have a number of different options for larger companies. I don't see that being a major issue for us in the next three to five years. We don't have complete visibility because we don't have all of that metadata surrounding it. Sometimes there might be more metadata before, it might be something afterwards, or there might be something missing, but we accept that because we don't have the funds to pay for the additional functionality that it can provide its a trade off.