No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ESET Inspect vs IBM Security QRadar comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 8, 2026

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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
122
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
49th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Security QRadar
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
218
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (5th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (2nd), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (2nd), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (11th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.0%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Security QRadar is 2.1%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.8%
IBM Security QRadar2.1%
ESET Inspect1.0%
Other93.1%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
Cees Van Den Haak - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Manager at Bouwbedrijf de Vries en Verburg BV
A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that you can manage and react to vulnerabilities and attacks on all the workstations or laptops. You can put certain workstations and isolation. With ESET PROTECT, you see only one machine that is protected, but with ESET Inspect, you see all the machines that are protected in an environment.
HarshBhardiya - PeerSpot reviewer
SOC Engineer at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Have managed daily asset and alert monitoring effectively but have encountered limitations with manual processes and interface usability
It's still very manual and doesn't work on its own. It's still in an early stage and not on par where we can consider it a really successful detection system. The accuracy is not there. The UI could be better when compared to Sentinels where we can use flags and tagging. It could be much more user-friendly. IBM Security QRadar has all features and is fully competitive with other SIEM tools, but when it comes to user-friendliness, a new user takes time to get used to it. More intuitive, user-friendly interfaces and more helpful documentation would be beneficial. The query searching and data fetching could be faster. In large to very large organizations with around 5,000 or 6,000 assets or beyond, even with proper configurations and RAM and hardware backing up, the query is fairly slow.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"One of the main benefits of the solution is its intelligence to correlate the events into an incident."
"The tool's use cases are relevant to security."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"We can visualize and control the activities in the environment from anywhere."
"Traps has drastically reduced our endpoint attack surface via advanced detection capabilities, sandboxing of never before seen programs, and by drastically limiting where executables can launch in the first place."
"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"In one single alert, we are getting the network telemetry, endpoint telemetry, email security telemetry, and proxy telemetry all in one single ticket, making it very easy."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"The product is very stable."
"Customer service is very good and very helpful."
"The pre-canned rules and reports in this product are a huge plus."
"The most valuable feature for us is probably the intelligence we get out of the product."
"The visibility it gives you into your infrastructure has been great."
"I think it has improved our organization by the speed at which I can run queries compared to other software that I've used in the past."
"It helps us discover any threats with their alerts and tracking."
"The most valuable features are the versatility of this solution and the variety of things you can do with it."
 

Cons

"The solution should add unwanted malicious hash values to a block list so that whenever the action is triggered, it will automatically prevent the malicious content."
"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"The GUI could be improved."
"A little bit more automation would be nice."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"It would be good if they could make an exception for applications. Sometimes, it can be a bit of a challenge to make exceptions for certain applications that have been used as rogue."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"The platform's price could be better."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"I have noticed the interface has room for improvement."
"The usability of interfaces could be improved."
"The IBM support can be better. It's an aspect that needs improvement."
"It is not easy to use. The updates are not very easy."
"Integration could be better. They should make it easy to integrate with other solutions."
"The product needs to improve its GUI."
"Right now, if you look at the compatibility, if you need to deploy QRadar in a physical appliance you have only two choices of server, their own or a Lenovo server. In today's world, you cannot keep something tied to such a big brand. Clients want to be able to use whatever type of server they want."
"We experienced some memory usage issues with a user behavior app."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"The solution's pricing is based on the EPS model."
"The pricing is always fine."
"The product is expensive. We have purchased the perpetual license, but we pay for the support."
"IBM's Qradar is not for small companie. Unfortunately, it would be 'overkill' to place it plainly. The pricing would be too much."
"There are additional costs, such as the cost associated with the different hardware required for implementation and deployment. Along with the add-on apps, these are all additional costs, and they require licensing as well."
"The price of this solution is a little high."
"I think my company pays for the license yearly."
"It's too expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
921,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
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
Comms Service Provider
14%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business50
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise57
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business93
Midsize Enterprise39
Large Enterprise107
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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, friendli...
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 a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Security QRadar?
I am overall satisfied with the licensing cost for IBM Security QRadar.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. IBM Security QRadar and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
921,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.