We performed a comparison between Devo and IBM Security QRadar based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The features I found valuable with the Sumo Logic Security solution are the search option and the ability to customize the search for the information in the logs."
"The most valuable features of Sumo Logic Security are the rules, use cases, and ease of use. Additionally, the integration is straightforward and good GUI."
"The tool has key features like operability. It will alert the admins whenever a device is onboarded."
"Technical support is always great."
"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 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."
"Devo helps us to unlock the full power of our data because they have more than 450 parsers, which means that we can ingest pretty much any type of log data."
"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 strength of Devo is not only in that it is pretty intuitive, but it gives you the flexibility and creativity to merge feeds. The prime examples would be using the synthesis or union tables that give you phenomenal capabilities... The ability to use a synthesis or union table to combine all those feeds and make heads or tails of what's going on, and link it to go down a thread, is functionality that I hadn't seen before."
"Those 400 days of hot data mean that people can look for trends and at what happened in the past. And they can not only do so from a security point of view, but even for operational use cases. In the past, our operational norm was to keep live data for only 30 days. Our users were constantly asking us for at least 90 days, and we really couldn't even do that. That's one reason that having 400 days of live data is pretty huge. As our users start to use it and adopt this system, we expect people to be able to do those long-term analytics."
"The most useful feature for us, because of some of the issues we had previously, was the simplicity of log integrations. It's much easier with this platform to integrate log sources that might not have standard logging and things like that."
"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 scalability is very good. It's not a problem."
"Customer service is very good and very helpful."
"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 playbook engine is flexible and allows for the graphical visualization of processes, enabling the implementation of dynamic playbooks for incident response or testing."
"The flexibility is good in terms of pulling log files."
"I think it's a very stable product that provides much more visibility than the other product."
"The solution is easy to use, manage, and review all incidents."
"The simplicity of the solution is the best feature."
"The integration with multiple sources could be better."
"The API integration in Sumo Logic Security could improve. There are delayed connections or they stop and then automatically start. Having a seamless log collection would be beneficial."
"In my opinion, this solution has a steep learning curve and requires practice if users to be able to use this tool very efficiently."
"From the network segmentation side, there is some discrepancy in log onboarding. The tool needs to improve direct API integrations, login integration, native login integration, etc."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
"An admin who is trying to audit user activity usually cannot go beyond a day in the UI. I would like to have access to pages and pages of that data, going back as far as the storage we have, so I could look at every command or search or deletion or anything that a user has run. As an admin, that would really help. Going back just a day in the UI is not going to help, and that means I have to find a different way to do that."
"Some of the documentation could be improved a little bit. A lot of times it doesn't go as deep into some of the critical issues you might run into. They've been really good to shore us up with support, but some of the documentation could be a little bit better."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the ability to parse different log types. I would go as far as to say the product is deficient in its ability to parse multiple, different log types, including logs from major vendors that are supported by competitors. Additionally, the time that it takes to turn around a supported parser for customers and common log source types, which are generally accepted standards in the industry, is not acceptable. This has impacted customer onboarding and customer relationships for us on multiple fronts."
"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 only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"From our experience, the Devo agent needs some work. They built it on top of OS Query's open-source framework. It seems like it wasn't tuned properly to handle a large volume of Windows event logs. In our experience, there would definitely be some room for improvement. A lot of SIEMs on the market have their own agent infrastructure. I think Devo's working towards that, but I think that it needs some improvement as far as keeping up with high-volume environments."
"The custom rules could be simplified more or it should be possible to use a different language, other than the ones that the solution is already using. They should add other languages into the mix."
"This solution is on-premise and many customers are moving to the cloud base solution."
"The usability of interfaces could be improved."
"The only challenge with products like IBM is the EPS. You just have to be really on the events per second, as that's where the cost factor becomes a huge issue."
"The solution should include remote action capabilities."
"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."
"The dashboard and reports are not user-friendly or efficient so are of little help with threat hunting activity."
"IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson could be more user-friendly. You need some skills and understanding of what you're looking at, especially if you're going to draw down specific information."
See how Devo allows you to free yourself from data management, and make machine data and insights accessible.
IBM Security QRadar is a security and analytics platform designed to defend against threats and scale security operations.
Devo is ranked 6th in Log Management with 12 reviews while IBM Security QRadar is ranked 2nd in Log Management with 68 reviews. Devo is rated 8.0, while IBM Security QRadar is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Devo writes "Accepts data in raw format but does not offer their own agent". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "Provides a single window into your network, SIEM, network flows, and risk management of your assets". Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, Elastic Security, AWS Security Hub and Fortinet FortiSIEM, whereas IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Elastic Security, Wazuh and LogRhythm SIEM. See our Devo vs. IBM Security QRadar 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.
