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

IBM Security QRadar vs Microsoft ATA [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 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

IBM Security QRadar
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
209
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (5th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (4th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (18th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (9th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (13th)
Microsoft ATA [EOL]
Average Rating
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

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.
it_user1369068 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good integration, simple to maintain, and very stable
Scalability shouldn't be a problem, at least for the size of network team that I work with. Right now we have between 400 and 500 users. This is deployed in a network that is actually about 500 users. We don't plan to increase usage. We're already using it as fully as we can and we don't have any more room. We might look at all the Microsoft programs that relate to office 365, like the ATP, because there is a difference between the ATA and the ATP. We are going to look and see whether there's any gaps that we can close. I think if you compare ATA with the actual ATP it's basically the same functionality. One is more on-premises versus the cloud. Since we are progressively in moving to the cloud, we might look at the ATP, which integrates better with the Microsoft cloud.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product provides a complete platform for ingesting the log, doing the correlations and handling the runtime."
"The dashboard is easy to use and easy to understand what's going on and what the alerts mean."
"The timeline and machine learning features are great."
"The ability to transition from microscopic to macroscopic view, instantly, is very good."
"I have found its network traffic log, network bit log, and QBI most valuable."
"An engineer can live-monitor all the flow happening in real-time. This would help us a lot while investigating a case, and it would even help us with preventive actions."
"The correlation and the parsing are important features, since it is very important for a SIEM to have a good scalability and performance."
"The pre-canned rules and reports in this product are a huge plus."
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"The solution works well when used with other Microsoft solutions."
"One of the most valuable features is the ability to report on questionable activity."
 

Cons

"Maybe there should be more custom rules in the exchange. Basically, we are using a lot of threat rules, so maybe they'll develop something like that."
"We sometimes get an error about the hard drive. Approximately once in two months, we can't find the logs, and they go missing, which is a terrible issue. We are getting support for this issue from our support company."
"Certain updates—especially when using Azure—don't apply directly. Our engineering team must invest additional effort to implement these updates. However, the tool's cloud-based version poses no issues. However, upgrading the product can sometimes be challenging for on-premises instances."
"QRadar log integration of various applications can be a tough job at times. There may be occasions when you will not find any QRadar guide on adding logs of a particular application. Even if you come across one, adding a log process is not an easy one."
"I'd like them to improve the offense. When QRadar detects something, it creates what it calls offenses. So, it has a rudimentary ticketing system inside of it. This is the same interface that was there when I started using it 12 years ago. It just has not been improved. They do allow integration with IBM Resilient, but IBM Resilient is grotesquely expensive. The most effective integration that IBM offers today is with IBM Resilient, which is an instant response platform. It is a very good platform, but it is very expensive. They really should do something with the offense handling because it is very difficult to scale, and it has limitations. The maximum number of offenses that it can carry is 16K. After 16K, you have to flush your offenses out. So, it is all or nothing. You lose all your offenses up until that point in time, and you don't have any history within the offense list of older events. If you're dealing with multiple customers, this becomes problematic. That's why you need to use another product to do the actual ticketing. If you wanted the ticket existence, you would normally interface with ServiceNow, SolarWinds, or some other product like that."
"Dashboards and reports could provide better visualization of SIEM activity."
"Technical support really needs to be improved. Right now, they aren't where they need to be at all."
"The advanced planning management (APM) features should be included."
"Some of the newer features are not completely there yet... For example, there's a tool that allows you to grade your overall internal security and I don't feel that it's completely accurate."
"It would be ideal if the interface allowed for more granular configurations. For example, if I were to set a rule that is a deviation from the pre-defined rules in the Microsoft product, there's conflict."
"There are occasions where it generates some false positives and you have to embark into figuring it out. You need to find out if it was a true alert or a false positive. It's a little bit cumbersome in that area."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When compared with other SIM solutions, QRadar is considerably less expensive."
"Our licensing costs for this solution is on a yearly basis."
"Go through a vulnerability assessment review for price breaks. A virtualized solution will also cut down on cost."
"I feel that the price is reasonable but compared to other products that are on the market, such as an offering by Microsoft, it is more expensive."
"It is overly expensive and overly complex in terms of licensing. They have many different appliances, which makes it extremely difficult to choose the technology. It is very difficult to choose the technology or QRadar components that you should be deploying. They have improved some of it in the last few years. They have made it slightly easy with the fact that you can now buy virtual versions of all the appliances, which is good, but it is still very fragmented. For instance, on some of the smaller appliances, there is no upgrade path. So, if you exceed the capacity of the appliance, you have to buy a bigger appliance, which is not helpful because it is quite a major cost. If you want to add more disks to the system, they'll say that you can't."
"In terms of additional costs, it depends on the subscription that you choose. There are plenty of options to choose from."
"We pay approximately $40,000 to use the solution annually. This solution is a lot less expensive than Splunk."
"It is cheaper than ArcSight."
"I believe we are looking into new licenses. They may be called the E5. Honestly, I don't have it on top of my mind, but I think it's around seven to $10 a user per month."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) solutions are best for your needs.
859,579 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
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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?
When comparing with Splunk, IBM Security QRadar's cost is reasonable. Splunk is more expensive than IBM Security QRadar.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
Microsoft Advanced Threat Analytics, MS ATA [EOL]
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Turkish Airlines, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Empa, The Alberta Teachers' Association
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Exabeam, Cynet and others in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA). Updated: June 2025.
859,579 professionals have used our research since 2012.