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.
"We’ve got process improvement that's happened across multiple different fronts within the organization, within our IT organization based on this tool being in place."
"Sentinel is a SIEM and SOAR tool, so its automation is the best feature; we can reduce human interaction, freeing up our human resources."
"The log analysis is excellent; it can predict what can or will happen regarding use patterns and vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the UEBA. It's very easy for a security operations analyst. It has a one-touch analysis where you can search for a particular entity, and you can get a complete overview of that entity or user."
"Free ingestion for Azure logs (with E5 licence)"
"The best functionality that you can get from Azure Sentinel is the SOAR capability. So, you can estimate any type of activity, such as when an alert was triggered or an incident was found."
"The log query feature has been the most valuable because it's very good. You can put your data on the cloud and run queues from Sentinel. It will do it all very fast. I love that I don't have to upload it to an Excel file and then manually look for a piece of information. Sentinel is much faster and is good for big databases."
"Sentinel uses Azure Logic Apps for automation, which is really powerful. This allows us to easily automate responses to incidents."
"The most powerful feature is the way the data is stored and extracted. The data is always stored in its original format and you can normalize the data after it has been stored."
"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."
"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."
"Devo provides a multi-tenant, cloud-native architecture. This is critical for managed service provider environments or multinational organizations who may have subsidiaries globally. It gives organizations a way to consolidate their data in a single accessible location, yet keep the data separate. This allows for global views and/or isolated views restricted by access controls by company or business unit."
"The most valuable feature is that it has native MSSP capabilities and maintains perfect data separation. It does all of that in a very easy-to-manage cloud-based solution."
"It's very, very versatile."
"In traditional BI solutions, you need to wait a lot of time to have the ability to create visualizations with the data and to do searches. With this kind of platform, you have that information in real-time."
"The thing that Devo does better than other solutions is to give me the ability to write queries that look at multiple data sources and run fast. Most SIEMs don't do that. And I can do that by creating entity-based queries. Let's say I have a table which has Okta, a table which has G Suite, a table which has endpoint telemetry, and I have a table which has DNS telemetry. I can write a query that says, 'Join all these things together on IP, and where the IP matches in all these tables, return to me that subset of data, within these time windows.' I can break it down that way."
"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 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 most valuable feature is what Securonix calls enrichment. Securonix is very powerful because of all the data it can process and automatically enrich. The actionable intelligence it provides is one of its benefits, due to the processing capacity it has."
"The user interface is easy to learn and navigate."
"I was looking for software as a service rather than having issues with managing hardware, upgrades, updates. I was trying to step away from that. Those were the key factors when looking at Securonix as a full-feature SIEM with next-generation capabilities available."
"The big data security analytics platform, structured and unstructured data analytics, and user and entity behavior analytics provided by the product are probably the best in the industry."
"[The solution has] incident-management or case-management functionality. If someone were to download a high number and we decided we needed to investigate it, I could open a case right in the tool. It would be able to directly reference the data that they downloaded and we could open and shut the case directly in the tool, as well as report from it."
"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 dashboards can be improved. Creating dashboards is very easy, but the visualizations are not as good as Microsoft Power BI. People who are using Microsoft Power BI do not like Sentinel's dashboards."
"It could have a better API to be able to automate many things more extensively and get more extensive data and more expensive deployment possibilities. It can gain some points on the automation part and the integration part. The API is very limited, and I would like to see it extended a bit more."
"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."
"One key area that can be improved is by building a strong integration with our XDR platform."
"Sentinel could improve its ticketing and management. A few customers I have worked with liked to take the data created in Sentinel. You can make some basic efforts around that, but the customers wanted to push it to a third-party system so they could set up a proper ticketing management system, like ServiceNow, Jira, etc."
"We'd like also a better ticketing system, which is older."
"Microsoft should improve Sentinel, considering that from the legacy systems, it cannot collect logs."
"Sentinel should be improved with more connectors. At the moment, it only covers a few vendors. If I remember correctly, only 100 products are supported natively in Sentinel, although you can connect them with syslog. But Microsoft should increase the number of native connectors to get logs into Sentinel."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to have the ability to create more complex dashboards."
"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."
"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
"My opinion on the solution's technical support is not as great as it could be because of the issues I have faced regarding the service management element."
"The biggest area with room for improvement in Devo is the Security Operations module that just isn't there yet. That goes back to building out how they're going to do content and larger correlation and aggregation of data across multiple things, as well as natively ingesting CTI to create rule sets."
"Some basic reporting mechanisms have room for improvement. Customers can do analysis by building Activeboards, Devo’s name for interactive dashboards. This capability is quite nice, but it is not a reporting engine. Devo does provide mechanisms to allow third-party tools to query data via their API, which is great. However, a lot of folks like or want a reporting engine, per se, and Devo simply doesn't have that. This may or may not be by design."
"We would like to see better integration with other products."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
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, LogRhythm SIEM, Wazuh and ArcSight Logger, whereas Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, LogRhythm SIEM, Exabeam Fusion SIEM and Gurucul UEBA. 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.
