We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Wazuh based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: IBM Security QRadar users say the solution provides extensive information and helpful leads for locating pertinent data. Wazuh stands out for its effortless integration, excellent log monitoring capabilities, and ELK-based investigation. IBM Security QRadar could improve its rule deployment and lower its false positive rate. Users would also like expanded storage capacity, streamlined user management, and a more mature architecture. Wazuh needs improvements in event source coverage, threat intelligence integration, and real-time monitoring of Unix systems.
Service and Support: Some customers of IBM Security QRadar have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. Wazuh's customer service is generally deemed satisfactory, and many customers noted that they could easily find answers from community forums.
Ease of Deployment: IBM Security QRadar's initial setup can be complex for users without expertise, and the difficulty may vary depending on the size of the data set. Some users said that Wazuh’s setup is easy and fast, while others perceived it as complicated and said it required a significant amount of time.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. Wazuh is a cost-effective option as it is open-source and completely free to acquire.
ROI: IBM Security QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. Wazuh's MSP program and partnerships offer opportunities to generate revenue from the platform.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer IBM Security QRadar over Wazuh. The advanced security features and overall strength of QRadar make it the favored option. Users like QRadar's extensive and actionable insights, user-friendly interface, and adaptability. QRadar offers a comprehensive overview of network activity and risk management.
"We can use Defender to block and monitor for security purposes without needing multiple other products to do different tasks."
"The product integrates security into one tool instead of having third-party security tools."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a stable solution."
"Scanning, vulnerability reporting, and the dashboard are the most valuable features."
"The timeline feature is excellent. I also like the phishing simulation. We have phishing campaigns to educate employees and warn them about these threats."
"The most valuable feature of all is the full integration with the rest of the software in the operating system and Office 365, as well as Microsoft SCCM. It is quite easy for us to work with the whole instance of Microsoft products. This integration improves the benefits of the whole suite of products."
"It's a great threat intelligence source for us, providing alerts for things it detects on the network and on the machines. We've used it often when there is a potential incident to see what was done on a computer. That works quite nicely because you can see everything that the user has done..."
"Among the most valuable features are the alert timeline, the alert story, which is pretty detailed. It gives us complete insight into what exactly happened on the endpoint. It doesn't just say, "Malware detected." It tells us what caused that malware to be detected and how it was detected. It gives us a complete timeline from beginning to end."
"It is really helpful to us from the compliance point of view."
"We get events and make the correlation, or rules. In IBM, we can implement our customer's rules. We can have very clear status threats and severity of antigens."
"It is incredibly easy to deploy. All the appliances are flexible in the roles that they serve and are all managed the in the same way."
"It is a very good SIEM."
"It saves a lot of time. We integrate the customer's firewall with all their networking devices."
"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."
"It has a lot of good correlation rules. From a customer's point of view, it is one of the best solutions because you don't need to create correlation rules from scratch. You just review them and customize them as you want."
"I have found IBM QRadar to be scalable."
"Wazuh has very flexible and robust features."
"It has efficient SCA capabilities."
"Wazuh's most beneficial features for our security needs are flexibility, built-in rules, integration capabilities, and documentation."
"We use it to find any aberration in our endpoint devices. For example, if someone installs a game on their company laptop, Wazuh will detect it and inform us of the unauthorized software or unintended use of the devices provided by the company."
"I like Wazuh because it is a lot like ELK, which I was already comfortable with, so I didn't have to learn from scratch."
"The MITRE ATT&CK correlation is most valuable."
"Wazuh is free and easy to use. It is also adjustable, and we can use it on the cloud and on-premises."
"Wazuh's logging features integrate seamlessly with AWS cloud-native services. There are also Wazuh agent configurations for different use cases, like vulnerability scanning, host-based intrusion detection, and file integrity monitoring."
"The data recovery and backup could be improved."
"The message trace feature for investigating mail flow issues should add more detailed information to the summary report... if they could extend the summary report a little bit, make it more descriptive, ordinary administrators could understand what happened and that the emails failed at this or that point. That way they would know the location to go to try to correct it and to prevent it from occurring again."
"The documentation on their website is somewhat outdated and doesn't show properly. I wanted to try a query in Microsoft Defender 365. When I opened the related documentation from the security blog on the Microsoft website, the figures were not showing. It was difficult to understand the article without having the figures. The figures were there in the article, but they were not getting loaded, which made the article obsolete."
"The only issue I've had is, when it comes to deployment, the steps I must take around policy setup. That is challenging."
"The only problem I find is that the use cases are built-in. There is no template available that you can modify according to your organization's standards. What they give is very generic, the market standard, but that might not be applicable to every organization."
"The tool gives inconsistent answers and crashes a lot."
"Since all of our databases are updated and located in the cloud, I would like additional support for this."
"The advanced threat-hunting capabilities are phenomenal, and the security copilot enhances that, but some data elements could be better or have more context inside of the advanced tables themselves. The schemas feel a little limited to what they're building into the product. It's probably just a maturity thing. I imagine we'll see the features I want in the next year."
"The only problem is that if you have too many events that occur, then the storage capacity becomes a problem. We would need to increase the storage capacity."
"IBM Security QRadar lacks automated response. With this feature, there's no need to visit VirusTotal or other sites for IP reputation. There should be a small plug-in where users can click to retrieve details about the reputation and organization of public IP."
"The AQL queries could be better."
"The dashboards are all legacy and old."
"I think that the search speed of this solution could be improved."
"The tech support is not that good."
"Ideally we would like a mobile version so that any alert that comes in will notify us in a mobile app, or by using SMS integration."
"The playbook guide which specifies the rules for security use cases needs to be provided to support in case the organization needs help."
"Wazuh should come up with more in-built rules and integrations for the cloud."
"It would be great if there could be customization for the decoder portion."
"Wazuh has a drawback with regard to Unix systems. The solution does not allow us to do real-time monitoring for Unix systems. If usage increases, it would be a heavy fall on the other SIEM solutions or event monitoring solutions."
"Its user interface for sure can be improved. It is not so comfortable to use if you're looking for specific logs."
"Wazuh could improve the detection, it is not detecting all of the attacks. Additionally, it is lacking features compared to other solutions."
"It would be better if they had a vulnerability assessment plug-in like the one AlienVault has. In the next release, I would like to have an app with an alerting mechanism."
"I have yet to find the same capability in Wazuh to get logs from different sources into the system"
"The deployment is a bit complex."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while Wazuh is ranked 3rd in Log Management with 38 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Wazuh is rated 7.4. 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 Wazuh writes "It integrates seamlessly with AWS cloud-native services". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Fortinet FortiSIEM, whereas Wazuh is most compared with Elastic Security, Security Onion, Splunk Enterprise Security and AlienVault OSSIM. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Wazuh report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors, best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.
