We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Intercept X Endpoint 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. QRadar stands out with its comprehensive network visibility and strong SIEM capabilities. Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. 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. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures.
Service and Support: Some customers of IBM Security QRadar have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness.
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. Intercept X Endpoint has a straightforward initial setup, with quick installation and simple configuration and maintenance. Some users said they occasionally encountered issues that required reinstallation.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale.
ROI: IBM Security QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment.
"Microsoft 365 Defender is simple to upgrade."
"I like 365 Defender's advanced threat hunting. The dashboard is user-friendly with templates for site policies, etc. The most important use case is evaluating the risk links and applications."
"From the perspective of Microsoft 365 XDR, the main benefit is a single, centralized dashboard offering the holistic visibility organizations crave."
"Having a single pane of glass for all Microsoft security services makes everything much easier. A security analyst can go to a single portal and see everything in one view. The integration of everything into one portal is a huge benefit."
"It has great stability."
"The most valuable aspect is undoubtedly the exploration capability"
"The common and advanced security policies for threat hunting and blocking attacks are valuable."
"It has been great for us. Previously, we didn't have a solution to protect us, especially from malware, whereas now, we are getting protection up front, especially from the malware attacks coming through emails or endpoints."
"It's a state-of-the-art product for security information and event management (SIEM)."
"The tool helps with infrastructure, application, and network monitoring."
"IBM QRadar is easy to scale, it doesn't affect the environment. In our office, we have around 40 - 50 users, but our clients have more users on their networks. Our organization has staff in the software department that manages IBM QRadar for us."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Most of our clients are interested in automation. The automation part is good because they are able to detect threats and vulnerabilities in real time. It's very fast."
"The product can scale."
"Log correlation is very useful for processing alerts. It serves to follow up alerts in real-time, building an entire workflow."
"It can analyze event logs, event security, and give a good consult."
"I find the security heartbeat feature with synchronized security very useful. It's a very nice feature that allows you to basically switch off an endpoint. When an endpoint has got a virus or something like that, or it's infected or compromised, you can isolate it from the network, but only if you've got an XG Firewall as well. It also provides ease of use. It is the only antivirus that can recognize 25 out of the 36 ransomware and virus techniques that have been often used in terms of the behavior base using heuristics. It's beautiful, utterly amazing. No other antivirus can do that."
"The dashboard is user-friendly."
"It is a practically maintenance free intelligent system that independently protects environments from malicious attacks."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos Intercept X is cloud management."
"After that, the client switched to Sophos to get the protection they lacked. It either works or it doesn’t and Sophos works."
"The most valuable features of Intercept X are server lockdown, auto-remediation, and encryption monitoring."
"The client isolation feature is a very effective feature."
"The pricing is fair. It's not too costly for our small organization."
"Offboarding latency should be reduced. Even after a device has been successfully offboarded using a particular offboarding script, it still shows up as onboarded."
"The cost can be high if you want to build custom license packages. Another area for improvement is the policies. In Azure, we need to implement policies in JSON format, but in 365 Defender 365, it would be helpful to use a different format so we can customize the platform."
"The management features could be improved, particularly in terms of better integration with Intune, Microsoft's cloud-based management solution."
"The data recovery and backup could be improved."
"The Defender agent itself is more compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 11. Other than these two lines, there are so many compatibility issues. Security is not only about Microsoft. The core technical aspects of it are quite good, but it would be good if they can better support non-Microsoft solutions in terms of putting the agents directly into VMware and other virtualization solutions. There should be more emphasis on RHEL and other operating systems that we use, other than Windows, in the server category."
"From an integration standpoint, it is always improving overall. With Security Copilot coming out, as partners, we are waiting for the GDAP support so that we can actually see Security Copilot on behalf of customers if they subscribe to it."
"There is no common area where we can manage all the policies for the EDR, third-party solutions, devices, servers, Windows, Mac, etc., but it's on the road map, and we ware waiting for that feature."
"One of the biggest downsides of Microsoft products, in general, is that the menus are often difficult to find, as they tend to move from place to place between versions."
"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 dashboard and reports are not user-friendly or efficient so are of little help with threat hunting activity."
"Dashboards and reports could provide better visualization of SIEM activity."
"There is room for improvement in IBM QRadar in integrating features for SOC maturity and security levels directly into QRadar."
"I think that the search speed of this solution could be improved."
"The user interface and configurability of IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics can be improved. It has a lot of pre-configured settings and not many things can be changed. It also needs more integrations. Currently, User Behavior Analytics is integrated only with IBM QRadar. It could have deeper integrations. It can also have more complicated scoring models. Currently, it has a very simple linear scoring model for users."
"What needs to be improved in IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is the user experience. It's not optimal. Some screens are a bit clunky. The solution needs to be more user-friendly."
"The features that could be improved include the licensing model and the dashboards and all those presentations. Overall, the user experience part can be improved."
"Installing Sophos Intercept X was not as straightforward, as we had to ask support and had to work with an integrator, though the process didn't take much time, e.g. it was completed within one hour."
"The security is good but the feature set is limited."
"The main real-time scanning takes most of the processing power of my notebook."
"The Data Loss Prevention module can be better. It should also have threat hunting capabilities."
"Should include additional integration."
"I am not very satisfied with the product's reporting overall, and it needs improvement in this area."
"There is room for improvement in terms of stability and updates."
"The endpoint detection and response (EDR) technology has room for improvement because the information that it gives us to resolve our problems is poor nowadays."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 20th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 198 reviews while Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 101 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Intercept X Endpoint 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 Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Intercept X Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors, best Managed Detection and Response (MDR) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.