We performed a comparison between CylanceOPTICS and IBM Security QRadar based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The initial setup was fairly straightforward. To get a large health care organization sorted, we had to create exemptions because some of the scripts and some of the automations were broken."
"The solution has a high level of trust in the industry."
"It's pretty unintrusive"
"It automatically blocks the threats, helping us investigate if they harm the environment."
"It is a bit early in our evaluation process to give proper feedback, although so far, the overall feedback is good."
"CylanceOPTICS is easy to use."
"CylanceOPTICS is pretty stable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to respond to zero-day and unknown threats."
"We run 65 servers globally with just two people: an engineering person and me."
"We are using the platform version, which I like."
"It is a pretty solid product for the type that it is representing. It is a CM solution as compared to Splunk or ArcSight from HP. It is also user friendly. It comes with some internal AI as well, in which it automatically maps multiple lots from unrelated devices and makes a smart decision to link them back and create an offense based on that. It is a smart tool."
"It is suitable for large companies with critical infrastructure. For our clients, robustness, availability at a high level, and the level of references and experiences connected to the solution are important."
"Senses, tracks, and links significant incidents and threats."
"This solution has excellent security analytics."
"The most valuable features are the AI assistant, which is good at detecting known types of behavior."
"What I like the most about it is that you can very easily install and configure it. As compared to other SIEM solutions, for which you need to know and do a lot more to prepare your SIEM environment, QRadar is much simpler to install and configure. There are various options in the Admin console. In the Admin tab, you can design dashboards and view various graphs. It has a lot of attractive features, and you don't need to configure everything on your own."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"The technical support could be improved although it's probably better than you get with a lot of the other traditional antivirus solutions"
"The product's initial setup process could be easy."
"The detection component is something that they have to work on."
"The tools are ineffective. It flags a lot of things. To give you an example, it detected Google Chrome and blocked the user's access to it. That it mistook for malicious, which turned out to be a false positive."
"Our customers would like to see more automation with respect to how threats are handled once they have been detected."
"One minor issue that somebody mentioned was that they didn't like their management console."
"The product's technical support is slow."
"The reporting is very weak and not very good at all."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the script which we have to create for custom actions. QRadar needs to improve that feature. Additionally, QRadar has to provide the playbooks designing features."
"I have noticed a few things while working on this. After the restart of the server, sometimes, the services misbehave, and you need to manually start or restart the service. I have seen that specifically with the Tomcat service. Sometimes, when you click on log sources, instead of opening the log source extension, it redirects you over the internet."
"It would be good if the program allowed certain profiles to only see certain customer information."
"Some UI enhancements would be nice, such as exporting custom event properties and the ability to export rules."
"I would like for Yara to be supported by all components."
"There is a lot of manual configuration required in order for the product to run smoothly, and I think that it could be made more automatic."
"The advanced planning management (APM) features should be included."
"I would also like to see more integration with other vendors. IBM doesn't integrate well with products from China, like Huawei. Many Middle Eastern customers are switching to Huawei from American vendors like Cisco because of the price. In most RFPs, Huawei wins because it costs less."
CylanceOPTICS is ranked 33rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 10 reviews while IBM Security QRadar is ranked 20th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 198 reviews. CylanceOPTICS is rated 7.6, while IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CylanceOPTICS writes "Enables the isolation and inoculation of infected machines, offering a practical solution for dealing with threats and preventing their spread within the environment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". CylanceOPTICS is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security. See our CylanceOPTICS vs. IBM Security QRadar report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.