We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and LogRhythm Axon based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of IBM Security QRadar are flexibility, IBM support, and scalability."
"We find predictive analysis capabilities valuable."
"This console gives you the entire view, which makes life easier and allows you to take precautionary measures."
"I think the QDI is very good."
"The rule engine is very easy to use — very flexible."
"It is a very good SIEM."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The initial setup is not complex or difficult."
"Scalability-wise, LogRhythm Axon is a good product."
"For me, the most valuable feature of LogRhythm AXON is the log parsing technology it has. With my company, I'm the current policy builder, so not having to know an archaic, cryptic format and being able to visually grab a log and assign an element to a particular meta tag quickly and easily and being able to run tests on that have been super useful. It's going to revolutionize the way the logs are identified and classified."
"The search feature within AXON is pretty robust. It's actually very fast in comparison to that in the previous platform. It's going to really help with investigations when they get rules put into the system."
"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."
"The solution should include remote action capabilities."
"The quality of technical support depends on the IBM support person. Sometimes, it's hard to get the right person on the other side. A ticket coordinator could be the key to better quality delivery."
"GUI needs to be improved."
"The solution could improve by having more out-of-the-box use cases."
"QRadar's performance has room for improvement because it cannot handle the volume. I need massive amounts of logs from various devices in our existing network architecture. IBM needs to improve QRadar's capacity to handle more logs."
"There are a lot of things they are working on and a lot of technologies that are not yet there. They should probably work out a better reserve with their ecosystem of business partners and create wider and more in-depth qualities, third-party tools, and add-ons. These things really give immediate business value. For instance, there are many limitations in using SAP, EBS, or Micro-Dynamics. A lot of things that are happening in those platforms could also be monitored and allowed from the cybersecurity risks perspective. IBM might be leaving this gap or empty space for business partners. Some larger organizations might already be doing this. It would be very nice if IBM can make some artificial intelligence part free of charge for all current QRadar users. This would be a big advantage as compared to other competitors. There are companies that are going in different directions. Of course, you can't do everything inside QRadar. In general, it might be very good for all players to provide more use cases, especially regarding data protection and leakage prevention. There are some who are already doing some kind of file integrity or gathering some more information from all possible technologies for building anything related to the user and data analysis, content analysis, and management regarding the data protection."
"I don't give it a 10 because it is something we have to request. I would love it if UBA was included out of the box like Microsoft."
"It's a very beta solution right now, and there are so many features that we would like to see added in, such as integration with Active Directory, which is essential for user management and for streamlining that process significantly."
"I'd give technical support a five out of ten. There are definitely areas that they can improve upon. Faster response times would be wonderful, and having more knowledgeable staff who provide the support would also be great."
"With LogRhythm Axon, stability and support are areas with shortcomings where improvements are required."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while LogRhythm Axon is ranked 40th in Log Management with 3 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while LogRhythm Axon is rated 7.6. 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 LogRhythm Axon writes "A tool that offers features like SOAR and UBA, along with an out-of-the-box connector for users". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas LogRhythm Axon is most compared with LogRhythm SIEM. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. LogRhythm Axon report.
See our list of best Log Management 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.