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

Devo vs OpenText Enterprise Security Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 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 Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
36th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (43rd), IT Operations Analytics (11th), AIOps (20th)
OpenText Enterprise Securit...
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
21st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 OpenText Enterprise Security Manager is 1.6%, up from 1.2% 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 (%)
OpenText Enterprise Security Manager1.6%
Devo1.1%
Other97.3%
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.
Ramnesh  Dubey - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows for monitoring logs according to industry standards within ESM but has a total capacity capped at 12 TB, limiting real-time data retention periods
The first limitation is with the ArcSight Data Storage Manager (ADSM). ArcSight's total capacity is currently capped at 12 TB. This becomes an issue if a customer needs a longer real-time data retention period, such as exceeding 90 days or reaching a year or even ten months. Increasing the disk space beyond 12 TB is not currently possible. So, increasing the storage capacity is one area for improvement. Additionally, the real-time data retention is limited due to the 12 TB restriction. Depending on the Events Per Second (EPS) you receive, you might only be able to retain data for seven to ten days. Overall, the 12 TB limit is the main issue we face in terms of maximizing real-time data storage. Moreover, there are a few improvements I would like to see in future releases. My main suggestion for ArcSight is to simplify the deployment process. Currently, the installation process is quite complex. There are various components involved, including transformations, multiple installations, and containerization for various components. Ideally, I'd recommend that ArcSight allow the entire installation, including the ESM and database, to be completed within a single unified setup process for a streamlined experience. Additionally, having readily available and well-organized documentation for the step-by-step installation process would be incredibly helpful. I would also like to see better support.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"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."
"Scalability is one of Devo's strengths."
"It centralizes security management within a business, functioning as a core system for a SOC."
"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."
"Devo has a really good website for creating custom configurations."
"The ability to have high performance, high-speed search capability is incredibly important for us. When it comes to doing security analysis, you don't want to be doing is sitting around waiting to get data back while an attacker is sitting on a network, actively attacking it. You need to be able to answer questions quickly. If I see an indicator of attack, I need to be able to rapidly pivot and find data, then analyze it and find more data to answer more questions. You need to be able to do that quickly. If I'm sitting around just waiting to get my first response, then it ends up moving too slow to keep up with the attacker. Devo's speed and performance allows us to query in real-time and keep up with what is actually happening on the network, then respond effectively to events."
"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 out-of-the-box rules that help us configure functioning rules within the environment are valuable."
"We use ArcSight ESM for log analysis and security alerts. It warns us of threats and then helps us conduct a forensic investigation of a cyber attack or internal incident after it happens."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation of different logs that are collected."
"The most valuable features of ArcSight ESM are the dashboards, ease of management for anyone, and simple for teams to provide reports related to cyber security. There are a lot of good features that are provided."
"The correlation feature is good."
"The most valuable feature of ArcSight ESM is its ease of use."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"The feature that I have found the most useful is that it can be deployed to the cloud."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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."
"Where Devo has room for improvement is the data ingestion and parsing. We tend to have to work with the Devo support team to bring on and ingest new sources of data."
"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."
"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."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"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."
"We have pricing issues. ArcSight ESM may not be the most user-friendly option, and its interface is quite traditional. However, despite these aspects, we find it a good cybersecurity solution. It needs to improve the dashboards, documentation, and support as well."
"The initial setup could be more straightforward."
"They also could improve the product by integrating user and identity behavior analytics."
"The stability of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is not very robust."
"Administration of ArcSight is not an easy job. The admin needs to be well experienced in it to identify the root cause and fix it."
"Deployment typology could be improved. Difficult to scale across all the different lines of businesses."
"When I asked our networking juniors for a comparison between LogRhythm and ArcSight, they said that both platforms are almost the same. It is just that LogRhythm is more modern with a digital platform, which probably gives it some advantage over ArcSight. ArcSight is a very old and mature product that is running on an old platform. It is an old legacy platform. In terms of new features, it just requires platform upgrades so that it becomes lighter and easily adaptable, specifically in the cloud. It would be a good thing if they can also make reporting easier."
"The product should include a lot more predefined scenarios so the adopted company will have knowledge and a broader skill set in security and network."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The way Devo prices things is based on the amount of data, and I wish the tiers had more granularity. Maybe at this point they do, but when we first negotiated with them, there were only three or four tiers."
"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."
"Be cautious of metadata inclusion for log types in pricing, as there are some "gotchas" with that."
"Devo was very cost-competitive... Devo did come with that 400 days of hot data, and that was not the case with other products."
"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."
"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."
"I rate the pricing a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"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."
"Customers without a ton of resources to dedicate to deployment may be better served by a managed ArcSight service."
"We have a license to use this solution. The price of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager is expensive."
"Pricing is good, I'd rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with ten being low price. It's better than Splunk and IBM QRadar because their pricing is based on EPS."
"ArcSight ESM is an affordable solution, it cost approximately $200,000 for three years. This price was at a substantial discount."
"​It is best to be an institutional buyer and directly contact the sales team, as they can provide over-the-top discounts for bulk orders.​"
"The product licenses are inexpensive."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"Price-wise, ArcSight ESM was a bit high compared to competitors, which factored into our decision to switch to Splunk. It couldn't cover all our business needs for what we wanted to implement."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
868,706 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
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
University
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Performing Arts
8%
 

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 Business37
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise57
 

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...
Which is the best SIEM tool for a mid-sized financial services firm: Arcsight or Securonix?
In my market, a lot of financial companies had or have an ArcSight installation. Just because in former times it was pretty good. Now a lot of them are looking for a more effective solution due to ...
What do you like most about ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM)?
We utilize ArcSight ESM for real-time threat detection in our organization. We have custom rules that we've developed on top of the WAN services, along with scheduled licensing activities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM)?
ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is very cheap compared to other tools. It is worth the investment if you are considering the cost.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus ArcSight, HPE ArcSight, ArcSight
 

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
Lake Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bank AlJazira, Banca Intesa, and Obrela.
Find out what your peers are saying about Devo vs. OpenText Enterprise Security Manager and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.