We performed a comparison between Devo and Logpoint 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. Logpoint is noted for its advanced technology and extensive log-collection, parsing, and analysis mechanisms. 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. Logpoint can improve its dashboard customization, resource efficiency, network hierarchy diagrams, and agent deployment.
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. Logpoint's customer service receives high marks for its exceptional technical support and responsive engineers, but some users reported delays in receiving help from higher-level support.
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. Logpoint's initial setup can be complex and time-consuming or fast and easy, depending on the user's experience and the organization’s size.
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. Logpoint's fixed pricing model is seen as cost-effective and competitive.
ROI: Devo offers a substantial return on investment thanks to the solution’s superior data ingestion, scalability, and cost savings. Logpoint makes costs more predictable and enables companies to generate revenue through security operation services.
"I like the unified security console. You can close incidents using Sentinel in all other Microsoft Security portals, when it comes to incident response."
"Sentinel is a SIEM and SOAR tool, so its automation is the best feature; we can reduce human interaction, freeing up our human resources."
"Sentinel has an intuitive, user-friendly way to visualize the data properly. It gives me a solid overview of all the logs. We get a more detailed view that I can't get from the other SIEM tools. It has some IP and URL-specific allow listing"
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based."
"It is quite efficient. It helps our clients in identifying their security issues and respond quickly. Our clients want to automate incident response and all those things."
"One of the most valuable features is that it creates a kind of a single pane of glass for organizations that already use Microsoft software. So, when they have things like Microsoft 365, it is very easy for them to kind of plug in or enroll those endpoints into the Azure Sentinel service."
"The most valuable feature is the alert notifications, which are categorized by severity levels: informational, low, medium, and high."
"We have no complaints about the features or functionality."
"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 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."
"Devo has a really good website for creating custom configurations."
"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."
"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."
"Scalability is one of Devo's strengths."
"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 alerting is much better than I anticipated. We don't get as many alerts as I thought we would, but that nobody's fault, it's just the way it is."
"What I like best about LogPoint is its cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions. LogPoint also has better dashboards which I find valuable. I also like that you can create use cases based on your assets."
"We like the user and entity behaviour analytics (UEBA) and find it valuable."
"The integration is very user-friendly. There are not many CLI commands. Everything is directly accessible from the web interface."
"The main advantage of Logpoint is the support service. They reply within ten minutes to an hour to our queries."
"The search feature is valuable. The dashboards are also valuable for our bosses. Another valuable feature, which is the main feature of the product, is the centralization of all the logs."
"They basically charge you in a better way."
"Technical support is responsive and very friendly."
"The most valuable features are the ones that we use the most, which are the search and report facilities."
"Multi-tenancy, in my opinion, needs to be improved. I believe it can do better as a managed service provider."
"Some of the data connectors are outdated, at least the ones that utilize Linux machines for log forwarding. I believe that Microsoft is already working on improving this."
"They can work on the EDR side of things... Every time we need to onboard these kinds of machines into the EDR, we need to do it with the help of Intune, to sync up the devices, and do the configuration. I'm looking for something on the EDR side that will reduce this kind of work."
"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."
"One key area that can be improved is by building a strong integration with our XDR platform."
"The AI capabilities must be improved."
"The solution could be more user-friendly; some query languages are required to operate it."
"Azure Sentinel will be directly competing with tools such as Splunk or Qradar. These are very established kinds of a product that have been around for the last seven, eight years or more."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"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 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."
"Dashboards could be developed further."
"I know that they have user behavior analytics, but it's an extra cost for this feature. It would be nice if it was in with the standard products."
"One of the downsides is it is not a SaaS solution. It must be on-premises."
"The interface needs things like wizards that will assist with creating complex correlation rules."
"It is a good product, but its interface or GUI could be better."
"We were missing visuals and graphics. Recently, a new version seems to have come out, and it has a new graphical user interface. When I was integrating it, it was usable, but the GUI needed improvement."
"LogPoint can improve its dashboards. We are not able to customize the dashboard when creating them. They only have preset dashboards which do not have exactly what we are looking for."
"Sometimes, the product is not stable."
Devo is ranked 16th in Log Management with 21 reviews while Logpoint is ranked 28th in Log Management with 20 reviews. Devo is rated 8.4, while Logpoint is rated 7.4. 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 Logpoint writes "Good technical support but it is complex to use and resource-heavy". Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Dynatrace, whereas Logpoint is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security, Rapid7 InsightIDR, Wazuh and LogRhythm SIEM. See our Devo vs. Logpoint 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.
