Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Devo vs IBM Security QRadar comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Devo
Ranking in Log Management
43rd
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
36th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
IT Operations Analytics (11th), AIOps (20th)
IBM Security QRadar
Ranking in Log Management
7th
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
211
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (18th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (8th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of Devo is 1.1%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Security QRadar is 7.0%, down from 9.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM Security QRadar7.0%
Devo1.1%
Other91.9%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

Michael Wenn - PeerSpot reviewer
Has cloud-first architecture with SIEM technology to run security operations
When it comes to scale, they're architected quite well. They handle some of the biggest customers globally, with significant throughput on their platform, managing thousands of customers. One of the most impressive aspects of Devo is its customer community. A large majority, over 80 percent of their customers, actively participate on a Devo-specific community page. They're contributing to product development and support, events, and user group information, helping each other out. This high level of engagement is rare and demonstrates both the loyalty of their customer base and the quality of their product. They offer a range of small, medium, and large options to cater to everyone. I sold Devo products while working with them, focusing on enterprise solutions. However, as a small reseller, my customers were typically smaller businesses. I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten.
Mahmoud Younes - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable installation and diverse use cases provide strong value
IBM Security QRadar has some areas for improvement. We have missed some DSM components. We need to customize logs where there is no DSM or connector for certain products. We can integrate but we have missed the DSM, which is the connector to pass logs coming from different applications. For example, with a university customer, we tried onboarding Canvas service. IBM Security QRadar does not support Canvas, so we had to create custom scripts and workarounds to pull logs from Canvas.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"One of the biggest features of the UI is that you see the actual code of what you're doing in the graphical user interface, in a little window on the side. Whatever you're doing, you see the code, what's happening. And you can really quickly switch between using the GUI and using the code. That's really useful."
"The real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"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."
"Being able to build and modify dashboards on the fly with Activeboards streamlines my analyst time because my analysts aren't doing it across spreadsheets or five different tools to try to build a timeline out themselves. They can just ingest it all, build a timeline out across all the logging, and all the different information sources in one dashboard. So, it's a huge time saver. It also has the accuracy of being able to look at all those data sources in one view. The log analysis, which would take 40 hours, we can probably get through it in about five to eight hours using Devo."
"The querying and the log-retention capabilities are pretty powerful. Those provide some of the biggest value-add for us."
"It's very, very versatile."
"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."
"Even if it's a relatively technical tool or platform, it's very intuitive and graphical. It's very appealing in terms of the user interface. The UI has a graphically interface with the raw data in a table. The table can be as big as you want it, depending on your use case. You can easily get a report combining your data, along with calculations and graphical dashboards. You don't need a lot of training, because the UI is relatively very intuitive."
"The threat hunting capabilities in general are great."
"We are using the platform version, which I like."
"The threat protection network is the most valuable feature, because when you get an offense, you can actually trace it back to where it originated from, how it originated, and why."
"It also has a graph that shows the traffic history. I can see what happened yesterday or today. If there's an incident, I can check the traffic behavior on QRadar."
"There are other third-party plugins that we can use."
"I think QRadar is stable and currently satisfies my needs."
"The product has plenty of features and capabilities."
"It's user-friendly when compared to other products."
 

Cons

"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."
"Some third-parties don't have specific API connectors built, so we had to work with Devo to get the logs and parse the data using custom parsers, rather than an out-of-the-box solution."
"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."
"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."
"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."
"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."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
"While the interface is easy to use, it could be a little more responsive."
"The solution is clunky."
"Improving the integration with IBM Server for MetaMask for correlation rules would be beneficial. Currently, I use Sentinel in Azure, and I would prefer creating one rule to roll it out to both Sentinel and QRadar. However, this is not possible because QRadar lacks this capability."
"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."
"The solution lacks some maturity."
"Technical support really needs to be improved. Right now, they aren't where they need to be at all."
"Needs better visualization options beyond the time series charts and a few other options that they have."
"The initial setup was complex, and it took six months."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the pricing a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"It's very competitive. That was also a primary draw for us. Some of the licensing models with solutions like Splunk and Sentinel were attractive upfront, but there were so many micro-charges and services we would've had to add on to make them what we wanted. We had to include things like SOAR and extended capabilities, whereas all those capabilities are completely included with the Devo platform. I haven't seen any additional fee."
"Devo was very cost-competitive... Devo did come with that 400 days of hot data, and that was not the case with other products."
"I like the pricing very much. They keep it simple. It is a single price based on data ingested, and they do it on an average. If you get a spike of data that flows in, they will not stick it to you or charge you for that. They are very fair about that."
"Devo is a hosted or subscription-based solution, whereas before, we purchased QRadar, so we owned it and just had to pay a maintenance fee. We've encountered this with some other products, too, where we went over to subscription-based. Our thought process is that with subscription based, the provider hosts and maintains the tool, and it's offsite. That comes with some additional fees, but we were able to convince our upper management it was worth the price. We used to pay under 10k a year for maintenance, and now we're paying ten times that. It was a relatively tough sell to our management, but I wonder if we have a choice anymore; this is where the market is."
"It's a per gigabyte cost for ingestion of data. For every gigabyte that you ingest, it's whatever you negotiated your price for. Compared to other contracts that we've had for cloud providers, it's significantly less."
"I'm not involved in the financial aspect, but I think the licensing costs are similar to other solutions. If all the solutions have a similar cost, Devo provides more for the money."
"Devo is definitely cheaper than Splunk. There's no doubt about that. The value from Devo is good. It's definitely more valuable to me than QRadar or LogRhythm or any of the old, traditional SIEMs."
"The price of this solution is reasonable."
"It's free of charge."
"IBM QRadar is a little bit expensive compared to other products."
"found other solutions, with more features at the same cost or less. You don’t have to leave the Gartner Magic Quadrant to beat their price."
"The pricing is higher but cheaper than others and there are no additional costs."
"I would like for them to lower the price."
"It is very expensive."
"It's not expensive for the resources that it gives you."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
870,697 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Jun 28, 2015
Qradar vs. ArcSight
Continuing with the SIEM posts we have done at Infosecnirvana, this post is a Head to head comparison of the two Industry leading SIEM products in the market – HP ArcSight and IBM QRadar Both the products have consistently been in the Gartner Leaders Quadrant. Both HP and IBM took over niche SIEM…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
10%
University
9%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business89
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise102
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Devo?
Compared to Splunk or SentinelOne, it is really expensive. I rate the product’s pricing a nine out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with Devo?
They can improve their AI capabilities. If you look at some integrations like XDR or AI, which add to the platform to correlate situations in events, there are areas for enhancement. For instance, ...
What is your primary use case for Devo?
Devo is a SIEM replacement technology used to run security operations. It centralizes security management within a business, functioning as a core system for a SOC. This system is the central cyber...
What are the biggest differences between Securonix UEBA, Exabeam, and IBM QRadar?
It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendlier GUI and are not licensed based on capacity (amount of logs and information in...
What SOC product do you recommend?
For tools I’d recommend: -SIEM- LogRhythm -SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is asking to miss details that are critical, and ending up a statistic. Also, rememb...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Security QRadar?
The pricing, setup cost, or licensing with IBM Security QRadar was costly. It was costly mainly for the things we used to use it for. The customers used to pay the price, but it was one of the prob...
 

Also Known As

No data available
IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

United States Air Force, Rubrik, SentinelOne, Critical Start, NHL, Panda Security, Telefonica, CaixaBank, OpenText, IGT, OneMain Financial, SurveyMonkey, FanDuel, H&R Block, Ulta Beauty, Manulife, Moneylion, Chime Bank, Magna International, American Express Global Business Travel
Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Find out what your peers are saying about Devo vs. IBM Security QRadar and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
870,697 professionals have used our research since 2012.