"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"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 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."
"The strength of Devo is not only in that it is pretty intuitive, but it gives you the flexibility and creativity to merge feeds. The prime examples would be using the synthesis or union tables that give you phenomenal capabilities... The ability to use a synthesis or union table to combine all those feeds and make heads or tails of what's going on, and link it to go down a thread, is functionality that I hadn't seen before."
"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."
"It's very, very versatile."
"Those 400 days of hot data mean that people can look for trends and at what happened in the past. And they can not only do so from a security point of view, but even for operational use cases. In the past, our operational norm was to keep live data for only 30 days. Our users were constantly asking us for at least 90 days, and we really couldn't even do that. That's one reason that having 400 days of live data is pretty huge. As our users start to use it and adopt this system, we expect people to be able to do those long-term analytics."
"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."
"When it comes to QRadar, they can do the correlation and not only in networks but also endpoints. This is one of the good features that we have noticed."
"The solution can scale."
"It is suitable for large companies with critical infrastructure. For our clients, robustness, availability at a high level, and the level of references and experiences connected to the solution are important."
"Most valuable features include the granularity of information."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very stable, easy to get going, and easy to manage. It is also easy to review all incidents."
"The features that I have found most valuable in QRadar are its data enrichment, use case creations, and adding references - those kinds of features are very good. Also QRadar's event filtration and device integration are perfect."
"We have worked with other solutions, such as LogRhythm and Splunk. Compared to others, IBM QRadar has the best price-performance ratio so that you are able to reserve minimum costs. It starts settling in fast and gets the first results very quickly. It is also very scalable."
"The solution is reliable."
"The other nice thing about Logz.io is their team. When it comes to onboarding, their support is incredibly proactive. They bring the brand experience from a customer services perspective because their team is always there to help you refine filters and tweak dashboards. That is really a useful thing to have. Their engagement is really supportive."
"It is massively useful and great for testing. We can just go, find logs, and attach them easily. It has a very quick lookup. Whereas, before we would have to go, dig around, and find the server that the logs were connected to, then go to the server, download the log, and attach it. Now, we can just go straight to this solution, type in the log ID and server ID, and obtain the information that we want."
"The visualizations in Kibana are the most valuable feature. It's much more convenient to have a visualization of logs. We can see status really clearly and very fast, with just a couple of clicks."
"Technical support could be better."
"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."
"The overall performance of extraction could be a lot faster, but that's a common problem in this space in general. Also, the stock or default alerting and detecting options could definitely be broader and more all-encompassing. The fact that they're not is why we had to write all our own alerts."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The user interface is a bit clunky, a bit hard to find what you need."
"Technical support could be improved by a bit."
"The implementation of the solution's technology needs to be simplified."
"The whole process for support is something that needs to be improved."
"The solution is highly used here in Pakistan and in many sectors, they could improve it by having more SIEM connectors."
"The product needs to improve its GUI."
"We need more features in order to create rules to detect or to meet some requirements for other areas, for example, catching the event from other authentication tools."
"I would like the rule creation interface to be much more user-friendly in the next release."
"I would like granularity on alerting so we can get tentative alerts and major alerts, then break it down between the two."
"I would like them to improve how they manage releases. Some of our integrations integrate specifically with set versions. Logz.io occasionally releases an update that might break that integration. On one occasion, we found out a little bit too late, then we had to roll it back."
"When it comes to reducing our troubleshooting time, it depends. When there are no bugs in Logz.io, it reduces troubleshooting by 5 to 10 percent. When there are bugs, it increases our troubleshooting time by 200 percent or more."
See how Devo allows you to free yourself from data management, and make machine data and insights accessible.
IBM QRadar is ranked 2nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 72 reviews while Logz.io is ranked 18th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 3 reviews. IBM QRadar is rated 8.0, while Logz.io is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM QRadar writes "Provides a single window into your network, SIEM, network flows, and risk management of your assets". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Logz.io writes "Improved our troubleshooting by giving us visibility into what's going on". IBM QRadar is most compared with Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Elastic Security, LogRhythm NextGen SIEM and Exabeam Fusion SIEM, whereas Logz.io is most compared with Datadog, Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel and Elastic Security. See our IBM QRadar vs. Logz.io report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors and best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.
