We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Wazuh based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: IBM Security QRadar users say the solution provides extensive information and helpful leads for locating pertinent data. Wazuh stands out for its effortless integration, excellent log monitoring capabilities, and ELK-based investigation. IBM Security QRadar could improve its rule deployment and lower its false positive rate. Users would also like expanded storage capacity, streamlined user management, and a more mature architecture. Wazuh needs improvements in event source coverage, threat intelligence integration, and real-time monitoring of Unix systems.
Service and Support: Some customers of IBM Security QRadar have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. Wazuh's customer service is generally deemed satisfactory, and many customers noted that they could easily find answers from community forums.
Ease of Deployment: IBM Security QRadar's initial setup can be complex for users without expertise, and the difficulty may vary depending on the size of the data set. Some users said that Wazuh’s setup is easy and fast, while others perceived it as complicated and said it required a significant amount of time.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. Wazuh is a cost-effective option as it is open-source and completely free to acquire.
ROI: IBM Security QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. Wazuh's MSP program and partnerships offer opportunities to generate revenue from the platform.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer IBM Security QRadar over Wazuh. The advanced security features and overall strength of QRadar make it the favored option. Users like QRadar's extensive and actionable insights, user-friendly interface, and adaptability. QRadar offers a comprehensive overview of network activity and risk management.
"The portal is quite user-friendly. There is integration with Office, Intune, and other products from the same portal. From there, we can see which policies are installed on a particular machine. We also can manage devices, groups, and tagging."
"I like that it's fully integrated with Windows, Microsoft 365 Exchange Online, and Outlook. It is better than other antivirus solutions because it's fully integrated with all Microsoft products. It's easy to integrate them and onboard all Windows devices from SCCM."
"The most valuable feature is the network security."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a good solution and easy to use."
"It has great stability."
"The solution is well integrated with applications. It is easy to maintain and administer."
"The product is very easy to use."
"The ability to integrate and observe a more cohesive narrative across the products is crucial."
"This solution provides me with various alarms, and I have found security issues with some of my other products."
"I really like the feature we have with the logs, that if there are any credit card numbers being used, like a PII, you can just use rejects and you can mask it. This is a really good feature in QRadar."
"We get events and make the correlation, or rules. In IBM, we can implement our customer's rules. We can have very clear status threats and severity of antigens."
"The detection rate is good and the false positive rate is low."
"The most valuable feature is the machine learning module."
"The best feature of IBM QRadar is visualization which shows you when there's a spike in the system, and this makes you realize that there's something wrong with the log."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The visibility it gives you into your infrastructure has been great."
"I like the features we use, including malware detection, inventory, detection of hidden processes, and activity logs. Inventory is probably the most important feature. It tells us when processes and packages were installed and what they are, which is helpful."
"It is excellent in terms of visualization and indexing services, making it a powerful tool for malware detection."
"Wazuh has very flexible and robust features."
"If they support a solution, it is easy to do an integration."
"It offers built-in modules for file integrity and vulnerability management."
"The MITRE ATT&CK correlation is most valuable."
"Integrates with various open-source and paid products, allowing for flexibility in customization based on use cases."
"I find the PCI DSS feature the most valuable, along with the feature that monitors the compliance of Windows and the CIS benchmarks on other devices like Unix or Linux systems."
"The abundance of sub-dashboards and sub-areas within the main dashboard can be confusing, even if it all technically makes sense."
"From an integration standpoint, it is always improving overall. With Security Copilot coming out, as partners, we are waiting for the GDAP support so that we can actually see Security Copilot on behalf of customers if they subscribe to it."
"The cost can be high if you want to build custom license packages. Another area for improvement is the policies. In Azure, we need to implement policies in JSON format, but in 365 Defender 365, it would be helpful to use a different format so we can customize the platform."
"Microsoft frequently changes the names of its products, sometimes even renaming entire portals or features."
"It would be beneficial to have a more seamless experience with everything consolidated in one place, particularly when dealing with aspects related to the Exchange console."
"Correctly updated records are the most significant area for improvement. There have been times when we were notified of a required fix; we would carry out the fix and confirm it but still get the same notification a week later. This seems to be a delay in records being updated and leads to false reporting, which is something that needs to be fixed."
"The only issue I've had is, when it comes to deployment, the steps I must take around policy setup. That is challenging."
"When we do investigations, it would be better if Microsoft could populate the host dashboard more. When we open any host for investigation, we want the entire timeline of what is happening on the host, including all the users logging in, their hardware, Windows version, etc."
"The reporting system could use some upgrading."
"I have also been working with other SIEM solutions, and I have observed that they have extensive Linux-based and Unix-based integrations. They have been able to support some of the Linux-based agents, which is useful to investigate and process the information on the Linux and Unix side."
"The architecture could be improved. I got stuck for a long time trying to understand the architecture, as it is quite challenging."
"Solution has too many menus that require going to two or three sub-monitors to enter the QRadar."
"I don't give it a 10 because it is something we have to request. I would love it if UBA was included out of the box like Microsoft."
"SOAR is what is expected the most from QRadar. They have something called SOAR Resilient, and it would be great if that gets induced in SIEM. IBM QRadar (as well as McAfee ESM) should have analytics platform integration. Currently, SIEMs don't have full-fledged integration with analytics where we are able to dump our data in SIEM, and the same data can be called from different analytics applications. We should be able to bring this data to a platform like Hadoop for big data and run the analytics there. Currently, people are seeing the past data and taking some actions in the present, but when it comes to analytics, there should be futuristic data where you can predict something out of your present and past data. Apart from that, I would like to see a full-fledged ITSM tool in QRadar. It sometimes has some technical issues that need to be checked. It requires a dedicated QRadar engineer to completely manage it. It has different module sets, such as event collector and event processor, and some technical glitches come in between. It takes the log but doesn't exactly process it in the way we want."
"You can scale IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics, but it has room for improvement."
"We need more features in order to create rules to detect or to meet some requirements for other areas, for example, catching the event from other authentication tools."
"Wazuh is missing many things that a typical SIEM should have."
"Scalability is a constraint in the on-prem version of Wazuh in terms of the volume of logs we can manage."
"Wazuh doesn't cover sources of events as well as Splunk. You can integrate Splunk with many sources of events, but it's a painful process to take care of some sources of events with Wazuh."
"Alerts should be specific rather than repeatedly triggered by integrating multiple factors. This issue needs improvement to create a more efficient alert system."
"Wazuh has a drawback with regard to Unix systems. The solution does not allow us to do real-time monitoring for Unix systems. If usage increases, it would be a heavy fall on the other SIEM solutions or event monitoring solutions."
"Wazuh needs more security and features, particularly visualization features and a health monitor."
"They could include flexibility and customization capabilities by modifying for customers based on partner agreements."
"Its configuration process is time-consuming."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while Wazuh is ranked 2nd in Log Management with 38 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Wazuh is rated 7.4. 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 Wazuh writes "It integrates seamlessly with AWS cloud-native services". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Sentinel, whereas Wazuh is most compared with Elastic Security, Security Onion, Splunk Enterprise Security, AlienVault OSSIM and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Wazuh report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors, best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.
