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.
"The common and advanced security policies for threat hunting and blocking attacks are valuable."
"The best feature is threat hunting. There are a lot of other features I like, such as the alert mechanism. The chain alert mechanism has a huge impact. It combines all the alerts into one incident and automatically correlates them with AI."
"In Microsoft 365 vendor products, monitoring and connectivity across all Microsoft and third-party connectors enable viewing of all activity within those environments."
"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."
"The integration, visibility, vulnerability management, and device identification are valuable."
"Microsoft Defender's most critical component is its CASB solution. It has many built-in policies that can improve your organization's cloud security posture. It's effective regardless of where your users are, which is critical because most users are working from home. It's cloud-based, so nothing is on-premise."
"Scanning, vulnerability reporting, and the dashboard are the most valuable features."
"It is the core of our entire SOX."
"The most valuable feature is user behavior analytics (UBA)."
"QRadar shows very effective correlations. If you combine all the logins plus user behavior and the current intelligence, it gives a very good correlation for business. I think it reduces the false positives in user activity monitoring because there is a lot of social information to correlate with other data."
"What we like about QRadar and the models that IBM has, is it can go from a small-to-medium enterprise to a larger organization, and it gives you the same value."
"It's hard for me to pinpoint any one feature that's most valuable because it is all about consuming logs and analyzing them. We started using QRadar UBA because we needed something that could analyze Linux authentication information. Other products take care of the Windows platform."
"Senses, tracks, and links significant incidents and threats."
"The rule engine is very easy to use — very flexible."
"Due to the skills shortage, we are able to use it from the standpoint of bringing in a lower level employee or a person who may not have security knowledge."
"The most valuable feature of Wazuh is the ELK for doing an investigation."
"Wazuh offers numerous features, such as the ability to define custom rules for detecting malicious activities and remembering behaviors."
"The main thing I like about it is that it has an EDR."
"The product is easy to customize."
"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."
"I like the cloud-native infrastructure and that it's free. We didn't have to pay anything, and it has the capabilities of many premium solutions in the market. We could integrate all of our services and infrastructure in the cloud with Wazuh. From an integration point of view, Wazuh is pretty good. I had a good experience with this platform."
"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."
"Wazuh automatically scans the host for CIS benchmarks for the latest updates and vulnerabilities and gives a host score. It provides a percentage of perceived risk due to of non patches or any missing patches on that work."
"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."
"When discussing the secure score, which includes overviews and recommended actions, some of these recommended actions are not applicable to us, particularly those related to Microsoft Internet Explorer, which we do not use in any of our environments."
"The management features could be improved, particularly in terms of better integration with Intune, Microsoft's cloud-based management solution."
"Since all of our databases are updated and located in the cloud, I would like additional support for this."
"The support could be more knowledgable to improve their offering."
"Sometimes, configurations take much longer than expected."
"Microsoft Defender XDR is not a full-fledged EDR or XDR."
"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 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."
"IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson could be more user-friendly. You need some skills and understanding of what you're looking at, especially if you're going to draw down specific information."
"IBM Qradar could improve the reporting. The tool is not designed to report. It's a great operational monitoring tool. You put it on a screen and you watch it. If you want to have analytics out of it, that's a whole different story. You're going to need more people and tools. What should be added is reporting and integration into Power BI, into some capability that produces analytical reports from the source data. IBM does not seem to care to add these features."
"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."
"The playbook guide which specifies the rules for security use cases needs to be provided to support in case the organization needs help."
"Integration could be better. They should make it easy to integrate with other solutions."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup due to bandwidth issues."
"IBM needs to invest more into the collaboration with other vendors."
"A lack of certain features creates limitations."
"We would like to see more improvements on the cloud."
"Wazuh doesn't cover sources of events as well as Splunk. You can integrate Splunk with many sources of events, but it's a painful process to take care of some sources of events with Wazuh."
"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."
"The computing resources are consuming and do not make sense."
"Its configuration process is time-consuming."
"The only challenge we faced with Wazuh was the lack of direct support."
"Wazuh could improve the detection, it is not detecting all of the attacks. Additionally, it is lacking features compared to other solutions."
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.
