We compared IBM Security QRadar and Splunk Enterprise Security across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Ease of Deployment: IBM Security QRadar’s setup can be more challenging and time-consuming compared to Splunk Enterprise Security. Some users found both solutions easy to install, but IBM Security QRadar took several weeks or even months, while Splunk Enterprise Security could be set up in just a day.
Features: IBM Security QRadar is praised for its ability to detect threats and its ease of use. It provides customizable rules, real-time network monitoring, and competitive pricing. Splunk Enterprise Security stands out in its ability to capture and analyze various data streams. It offers valuable features like a search function, session reports, and graphing capabilities.
Room for Improvement: IBM Security QRadar could enhance its pricing, threat identification, plugins, and threat detection, EPS challenge, training, and technical support. Splunk Enterprise Security has room for improvement in its search algorithm, licensing model, technical support, AI capabilities, pricing, and machine learning algorithms.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar’s cost differs based on the organization's requirements and structure. Certain users perceive it as reasonable, while others view it as costly. Similarly, Splunk Enterprise Security's pricing is subjective, as some users find it expensive while others find it reasonable.
ROI: Both Splunk Enterprise Security and IBM Security QRadar are cost-effective solutions with a favorable ROI. QRadar offers user behavior analytics and employee profiling. Splunk enhances security measures and is known for its flexibility and ability to provide global observability.
Service and Support: Both IBM Security QRadar and Splunk Enterprise Security have received varying feedback regarding their customer service and support. Users have commended the staff's expertise and responsiveness for both products. However, there have been complaints about slow response times and a lack of expertise.
Comparison Results: IBM Security QRadar and Splunk Enterprise Security have similarities in terms of setup complexity and value in detection capabilities and user-friendliness. IBM Security QRadar offers a wide range of features, including real network monitoring, security orchestration automated response, and risk scoring for user activity. Splunk Enterprise Security is praised for its search function, session reports, and graphing capabilities, as well as scalability and machine learning capabilities. IBM Security QRadar may have an advantage in features and pricing, while Splunk Enterprise Security may have an advantage in search capabilities and scalability.
"Sentinel is a SIEM and SOAR tool, so its automation is the best feature; we can reduce human interaction, freeing up our human resources."
"The native integration of the Microsoft security solution has been essential because it helps reduce some false positives, especially with some of the impossible travel rules that may be configured in Microsoft 365. For some organizations, that might be benign because they're using VPNs, etc."
"Investigations are something really remarkable. We can drill down right to the raw logs by running different queries and getting those on the console itself."
"I believe one of the main advantages is Microsoft Sentinel's seamless integration with other Microsoft products."
"The most valuable feature is the UEBA. It's very easy for a security operations analyst. It has a one-touch analysis where you can search for a particular entity, and you can get a complete overview of that entity or user."
"The initial setup is very simple and straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the alert notifications, which are categorized by severity levels: informational, low, medium, and high."
"There are a lot of things you can explore as a user. You can even go and actively hunt for threats. You can go on the offensive rather than on the defensive."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The initial setup of QRadar is not complex because we have done it before and we are used to the development. It is getting easier all the time."
"The ability to transition from microscopic to macroscopic view, instantly, is very good."
"It protect us from multiple authentication values, unauthorized access and antivirus threats."
"It comes with many rules disabled. You can tune them and modify them according to your enterprise needs and avoid false positives."
"The scalability is good."
"It is a bit easier to use than other products, such as Splunk or ELK Elasticsearch."
"It can analyze event logs, event security, and give a good consult."
"It is very stable. We have not had any problems."
"Splunk gives my clients the ability to bring multiple, disparate types of data together, then correlate and report on them."
"The initial setup isn't overly complex."
"The ability to ingest different log types from many different products in our environment is most valuable."
"Its usability is the best part. It is easy for our developers to use if they want to search their logs, etc."
"It can log more logs than other solutions. It's a good way to troubleshoot problems."
"Splunk has give us the capability to easily track problems and their status."
"Splunk can extract all kinds of data. There's no limitation on what kind of structured and unstructured data one needs to extract — it can access any kind of data, including machine-generated data."
"Azure Sentinel will be directly competing with tools such as Splunk or Qradar. These are very established kinds of a product that have been around for the last seven, eight years or more."
"The solution should allow for a streamlined CI/CD procedure."
"It could have a better API to be able to automate many things more extensively and get more extensive data and more expensive deployment possibilities. It can gain some points on the automation part and the integration part. The API is very limited, and I would like to see it extended a bit more."
"Sentinel's alerts and notifications are not fully optimized for mobile devices. The overall reporting and the analytics processes for the end user should also be improved. Also, the compatibility and availability of data sources and reports are not always perfect."
"There is some relatively advanced knowledge that you have to have to properly leverage Sentinel's full capabilities. I'm thinking about things like the creation of workbooks, how you do threat-hunting, and the kinds of notifications you're getting... It takes time for people to ramp up on that and develop a familiarity or expertise with it."
"They're giving us the queries so we can plug them right into Sentinel. They need to have a streamlined process for updating them in the tool and knowing when things are updated and knowing when there are new detections available from Microsoft."
"The learning curve could be improved. I am still learning it. We were able to implement the basic features to get them up and running, but there are still so many things that I don't know about all its features. They have a lot of features that we have not been able to use or apply. If they could work on reducing the solution's learning curve, that would be good. While there is a training course held by Microsoft to learn more about this solution, there is a cost associated with it."
"The only thing is sometimes you can have a false positive."
"I would also like to see more integration with other vendors. IBM doesn't integrate well with products from China, like Huawei. Many Middle Eastern customers are switching to Huawei from American vendors like Cisco because of the price. In most RFPs, Huawei wins because it costs less."
"There is one problem with QRadar in regards to the add-on apps. The apps can be frustrating. For example, when I add a big app like one of the add-ons for resiliency, add-on applications for QRadar, these applications require different hardware to implement and to deploy. The resiliency connector because there's a considerable amount of data scanning, operates for these apps correctly."
"I would like to see the update process simplified."
"The biggest problem was built on top of the QRadar in the executive operations center network. The integration was not using the network security specialist properly, and all the incidents were inferior with QRadar. Its compatibility is not really good."
"The user interface needs improvement."
"The interface is very old. IBM should remake it into a more modern interface."
"IBM QRadar has a margin for development, for out-of-the-box use cases. It can be enhanced with better support and automate the use cases for that."
"This solution is on-premise and many customers are moving to the cloud base solution."
"It can be tough to determine if you are getting all of the value out of your investment at times."
"It is a challenge to manage the environment in such a way, that one’s log, even with the bandwidth license, isn’t exceeded."
"Make it easier to include roles and user controls, as it is horrible now."
"It needs more formatting control without having to be an admin."
"The product was designed for security and IT with business intelligence needs, such as PDF exporting, but this has not been the highest priority. While the functionality is there, it could be developed more."
"I would like to see an updated dashboard. The dashboard is a little out-of-date. It could be made prettier."
"The UI could be better. This is applicable to Splunk in general. I know that a lot of people who get their hands on Splunk are hesitant to use it just because they find it overwhelming. There are a lot of options."
"Its interface could be improved."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 1st in Log Management with 228 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Splunk Enterprise Security writes "It has a drag-and-drop interface, so you don't need to know SQL or Java to construct a query ". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security, Fortinet FortiSIEM and Sentinel, whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, Elastic Security, Azure Monitor and Datadog. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Splunk Enterprise Security report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors and best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Log Management 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.
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, remember that any EDR/XDR should integrate to the SIEM/SOAR and a strong threat intel source.
If you consider SOC outsourcing take your time and find one you can integrate like a virtual team member. They are only as good as their depth of knowledge in your business and your on-prem SOC.
Apache Metron, ELK, OSSIM, Splunk and Qradar (in cost/benefit order for starters).
I have no experience with Rapid 7 or InsightIDR.
IBM Qradar works great but is not easy to install. If it is running it is a great tool. Also depending on the budget, Riverbed security is a tool to consider. Costs are lower than QRadar and easier to implement.
Or you can use our SaaS solution with QRadar and a lot more built-in. One holistic solution for your complete IT environment.
@Evgeny Belenky, I found Stellar to be quite intriguing.
I would also recommend McAFee’s new console for centralizing and coordinating a well-deployed enterprise solution.
COMODO MDR
Disclaimer: ICE Consulting offers SOC as a Service to our Clients.
For SOC Tools we use Securonix and other in-house developed solutions. Securonix provides an all in one package (SIEM, UEBS, & NTA) that we believe is competitively priced for the Small to Mid Market. Their Customer Service seems better than most and they are always highly rated in the Gartner MQ reports. Set-up is not difficult, but is time consuming for the first time, afterwards each client deployment we have added has seemed to get easier and quicker.
Please contact several vendors and ask for demos, talk with the vendor engineers to ensure the solution will workfor your needs... We evaluated Rapid7, AlienVault (ATT Cybersecurity), QRadar, LogRythm, and Securonix before deciding on Securonix.
Also take your time in evaluating and re-evaluating the products, I took us about about 18 months and over $30K of working with what was utimately the wrong product for us, before moving to Securonix.
Make sure training for the use of the service is included. We have been able to provide entensive training to out team through the vendor and would not have been able to get out SOC offering off the ground without it.
Good Luck!
COMODO SOC covers your entire network and also your email. It is very easy to deploy and is very effective for reports.
I prefer the COMODO SOC solution because it is a very good and easy to deploy product.