Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

NetWitness Platform vs RSA enVision comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

NetWitness Platform
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
33rd
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (34th)
RSA enVision
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
31st
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of NetWitness Platform is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RSA enVision is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
RSA enVision0.6%
NetWitness Platform0.9%
Other98.5%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

MOTASHIM Al Razi - PeerSpot reviewer
CISO at One Bank Limited
It is a stable solution, but they should make the user interface easier to understand
The solution's initial setup takes work. We have to organize multiple paths and many features. The deployment process takes less than a week. But it takes a month to complete if we want to make the solution smarter by integrating it with various devices. I rate the process as a six out of ten.
reviewer1093020 - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security and Compliance Lead Engineer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
Though the solution offers good technical support, it needs to be made more user-friendly
I rate the initial setup a seven and a half out of ten. So, it's closer to seven. The tool is deployed in our organization on-premises with some test servers. In only two tests in a test environment, the deployment can be carried out. The deployment time only depends on the size of your infrastructure. If I limit the company's size, it will not take too much time. So, it can be done in seven to eight hours. Regarding the deployment process, we have managed some test servers, after which we need to install some agents. If you include more servers, you need to install more agents. If you want to use agent-based, I would say that it is totally up to the stakeholder. You will get some additional benefits if you can choose the agent since you will be more assured that less positive false positive results you will get from the tool. For deployment, one test server, a few deployment servers, and some policy configurations are done by the OEM with some local support. We used some Windows servers and Linux servers, and we installed some agents in different types of operating systems. So different versions of Linux and different versions of Windows. We also integrate some network devices like firewalls to integrate firewalls and logs. So, the amount of logs and firewalls is too much. I have to engage too many employees for deployment. So there are those for Linux servers, others for Windows servers, and the rest for network devices. One for SIEM policy creation and one for SIEM management administration is also required.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Packet Solution: Allows analyst proactive hunting and alerting on daily sophisticated APTs."
"Stability has not been an issue with this product."
"Since the solution has been under way we have seen a large decrease of threats and proactive reactions to incidents."
"Performance and reporting are very good."
"Prior to implementing the solution, the customers had no visibility of their assets, however, after adopting the solution, they have gained complete visibility over all their assets, including a comprehensive understanding of the network and attack symptoms."
"The most valuable feature of RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets are the alerts and correlations tools."
"The most valuable feature of RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets are the alerts and correlations tools."
"It's quite economical compared to other solutions in the market."
"We developed around this solution and received excellent support from the company."
"The most valuable feature is the management features. It's capable of managing large enterprises."
"The ease of log collection and stability of the platform are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the management features. It's capable of managing large enterprises."
"The configuration part is very easy...The technical support was sincere in their responses...I rate the technical support a nine out of ten."
"RSA enVision provides the full system visibility of your events within your IT ecosystem."
"The custom dashboard and correlation alerts in this solution improved our incident response process."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the reporting."
 

Cons

"The threat detection capability and centralizing and upgrading capability need to be improved. The threat alert capability needs to be improved as well because there is some lag time at present. They need to work on their database search too."
"The initial setup was complex because it took a lot of time to complete the implementation."
"We encountered stability issues in the earlier versions, and much fewer in the newer versions."
"Health monitoring of the event sources and devices."
"It is not so easy to customize this product."
"The implementation needs assistance."
"It is not so easy to customize this product."
"The product's licensing models are complex to understand. This particular area needs improvement."
"The integration could be easier, it should support more products."
"Whenever you perform the query, it takes too long."
"Sometimes the investigation panel and reporting engine work very slowly."
"The integration could be easier, it should support more products."
"In general, the solution currently isn't user-friendly."
"Licensing could be improved to be more oriented towards Managed Service Providers (MSPs)."
"There is no future for this solution. It does not exist anymore."
"RSA enVision log manager is out of date and is not in use anymore."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have yearly licensing costs. The license fee can be based on the volume of EPS. Some organizations may have, as a gentlemanly gesture, 10,000 EPS and get a 3,000 EPS license but actually use 5,000 EPS."
"There is a licensing fee and the customer can choose whether he wishes this to be subscription-based or perpetual."
"The product is expensive."
"We are on an annual license for the use of the solution."
"The tool is very expensive, so I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. The solution has an annual subscription."
"Our license is for one year."
"We have a perpetual license, so the total cost of ownership is not very expensive. It's a good investment."
"The product price was reasonable for my region and the market."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high price, I rate the pricing a six."
"We no longer pay a licensing fee because it is out of date and don't pay for support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
885,264 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Feb 26, 2015
HP ArcSight vs. IBM QRadar vs. ​McAfee Nitro vs. Splunk vs. RSA Security vs. LogRhythm
We at Infosecnirvana.com have done several posts on SIEM. After the Dummies Guide on SIEM, we are following it up with a SIEM Product Comparison – 101 deck. So, here it is for your viewing pleasure. Let me know what you think by posting your comments below. The key products compared here are…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Performing Arts
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise20
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about NetWitness Platform?
The product's initial setup phase was not at all difficult.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetWitness Platform?
The pricing is comparable to others, and I consider the cost to be intermediate. Specific cost details are unknown to me.
What needs improvement with NetWitness Platform?
There is currently no need for improvement in the SIEM ( /categories/security-information-and-event-management-siem ), though there could be potential enhancements by integrating with AI.
What needs improvement with RSA enVision?
Licensing could be improved to be more oriented towards Managed Service Providers (MSPs). Perhaps offering different types of licensing would be beneficial, as it can be expensive for industries wi...
What advice do you have for others considering RSA enVision?
Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. I recommend using it, but it also depends on the needs and the budget. If I still had my company, I think we would continue using RSA enVision. However, ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for RSA enVision?
It's competitive, but they need to adapt to MSPs. Maybe that's not their target market, though.
 

Also Known As

RSA Security Analytics
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Los Angeles World Airports, Reply
BPS (SUISSE), Hypovereinsbank Germany, MAX Hamburgers, Infoplex, Neotel, Telus
Find out what your peers are saying about NetWitness Platform vs. RSA enVision and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,264 professionals have used our research since 2012.