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

IBM Security QRadar vs Seceon Open Threat Management Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 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
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
209
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (5th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (15th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (9th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (13th)
Seceon Open Threat Manageme...
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
26th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of IBM Security QRadar is 7.7%, down from 9.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Seceon Open Threat Management Platform is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

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.
TamimKhan - PeerSpot reviewer
Customization options need improvement but valuable threat management features and reasonable pricing benefit service providers
We are a Managed Security Service Provider (MSSP), and we provide services to our customers Seceon Open Threat Management Platform offers valuable features such as XDR and EDR. I also find the SOC and SOAR features valuable. Log management is another key functionality of the product. There are…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is easy to use, manage, and review all incidents."
"The tool's most valuable feature is log source management. It enables us to connect to various log sources, including content, authentications, or other customized integrations. These integrations can be tailored for use with other platforms that don’t already have built-in IBM add-ons."
"The scalability is very good. It's not a problem."
"It's a state-of-the-art product for security information and event management (SIEM)."
"I really like the feature we have with the logs, that if there are any credit card numbers being used, like a PII, you can just use rejects and you can mask it. This is a really good feature in QRadar."
"It integrates very easily with other solutions. The solution is flexible. We can add anything to it, as it is a good companion to other tools."
"The stability is good."
"The most valuable feature is the QRadar Vulnerability Manager which provides vulnerability scans. In addition, I like the way QRadar generates alerts."
"The algorithm used in Seceon OTM is clear and logical, categorizing events as needed. This helps us identify and respond to threats effectively."
"It is effective because it has threat intelligence from across the world and constantly checks and updates for new threats."
"It offers a holistic approach with multiple solutions blended into one platform."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its artificial intelligence."
"The main thing is the value proposition. It is one of the most sophisticated yet affordable solutions that I've come across. It is also one of the easiest-to-manage yet comprehensive solutions for a SOC analyst. Its customizations are really good, and it has a lot of integrations. It is multi-tenant and very fast to onboard. Its stability is 100%. We've never had an outage with it. It doesn't require extensive hardware resources. Its level of support is also very good. They have a very responsive technical team."
"The pricing of Seceon Open Threat Management Platform is very reasonable."
"You can use different solutions in a single platform which is very easy and attractive for customers."
"Seceon Open Threat Management Platform notifies only genuine alerts. It offers plenty of options that are suitable for MSPs."
 

Cons

"There are areas in IBM Security QRadar that could benefit from improvement. Its ability to customize knowledge for specific purposes could be enhanced. Also, it lacks clarity in presenting details. It is also difficult to see the reports."
"The tool is very complicated. One place for improvement would be to have a more user-friendly interface. Having better support in Spanish would be cool."
"There are reports that I would like to generate that are either not included, or I cannot find."
"Do your research before implementing it, because it is tough to implement."
"The interface is very old. IBM should remake it into a more modern interface."
"I think QRadar is very complex. It's a distributed system and IBM QRadar has an all-in-one solution which is not like that distributed solution but it's a good product. IBM needs to consider the user interface because if we compare it with AlienVault, the AlienVault user interface is fantastic but the IBM QRadar user interface is very complex. They should focus on how to make it easier for the client."
"There is room for improvement in IBM QRadar in integrating features for SOC maturity and security levels directly into QRadar."
"It would be better if it were more stable and more secure. The price for maintenance could be better. It's too high. In the next release, I think they should focus on the price and the operation."
"The product should improve the triggering rate."
"The SOP they provided wasn't great. They offered training over Sherp Virtualization, and the Seceon leadership visited our location to explain everything in detail, but the documentation and training could be better. It isn't as effective as it could be. There's some room for improvement there."
"The management console could use some enhancements."
"The product could be improved by including sandboxing capabilities in the next release."
"The dashboard has always been an issue."
"For small to medium-sized customers, Seceon Open Threat Management Platform is good. However, for large enterprises, it is not as effective."
"For future releases, integrating incident response tools and improving communication on incident reporting could be beneficial."
"It would be ideal with the processing was more manageable. Not many customers are willing to have a dedicated server with two CPUs and one TB of memory. The cost of this is huge for a smaller organization."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Most of the time, it is easier and cheaper to buy a new product or the QRadar box."
"QRadar UBA's price is a little more than street price and could be reduced."
"A good approach would be to begin with an On Cloud subscription, then later on do a more exact sizing."
"The solution has a licensing model that is based on events per second so it scales to need and budget."
"The product is expensive. We have purchased the perpetual license, but we pay for the support."
"When compared with other SIM solutions, QRadar is considerably less expensive."
"The tool's on-premise version is expensive. However, it is cheaper than Splunk. The hybrid model offers shared instances for customers, which is not expensive. Customers with a limited budget can opt for it. You can get premium support with licenses. However, if you need customized integration, you need to buy it."
"Customers have to purchase a license based on the number of users, devices, and applications they want to protect. It allows you to take a license on a subscription basis for three years or five years."
"The pricing is very competitive. It's not expensive."
"Seceon Open Threat Management Platform is cost-effective because it's a comprehensive platform that offers high availability."
"It has a per-asset model instead of an ingestion-based model, which gives predictable pricing. In terms of price, it is in the middle to lower range of SIEMs that it competes against. It is the most affordable solution that we have implemented so far. It was much more affordable than anything else I've implemented."
"We used the solution's trial version for two months and later purchased it."
"The solution is cheap and very competitive. It offers good tuning in terms of the pricing. Other solutions like Palo Alto and IBM are more expensive."
"I find Seceon OTM's pricing to be reasonable, not too high or low, just okay for the market standards. I can't disclose specific figures, we pay on a quarterly basis under a service model. I would rate it eight out of ten. As a customer, I always hope for better pricing options."
"The price is quite reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
862,514 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
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
24%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
What do you like most about Seceon Open Threat Management Platform?
The algorithm used in Seceon OTM is clear and logical, categorizing events as needed. This helps us identify and respond to threats effectively.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Seceon Open Threat Management Platform?
The pricing of Seceon Open Threat Management Platform is very reasonable.
What needs improvement with Seceon Open Threat Management Platform?
There are areas for improvement in the customization options. Every ( /products/every-reviews ) quarter, they are developing the platform with new updates based on feedback provided.
 

Also Known As

IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
Seceon OTM, Seceon aiSIEM, aiSIEM, Seceon Open Threat Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Caduceus, SUNY
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Security QRadar vs. Seceon Open Threat Management Platform and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
862,514 professionals have used our research since 2012.