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

OpenText Enterprise Security Manager vs Snare comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

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

OpenText Enterprise Securit...
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
21st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Snare
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
43rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (35th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Security Manager is 1.6%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Snare is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Enterprise Security Manager1.6%
Snare0.5%
Other97.9%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

Ramnesh  Dubey - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows for monitoring logs according to industry standards within ESM but has a total capacity capped at 12 TB, limiting real-time data retention periods
The first limitation is with the ArcSight Data Storage Manager (ADSM). ArcSight's total capacity is currently capped at 12 TB. This becomes an issue if a customer needs a longer real-time data retention period, such as exceeding 90 days or reaching a year or even ten months. Increasing the disk space beyond 12 TB is not currently possible. So, increasing the storage capacity is one area for improvement. Additionally, the real-time data retention is limited due to the 12 TB restriction. Depending on the Events Per Second (EPS) you receive, you might only be able to retain data for seven to ten days. Overall, the 12 TB limit is the main issue we face in terms of maximizing real-time data storage. Moreover, there are a few improvements I would like to see in future releases. My main suggestion for ArcSight is to simplify the deployment process. Currently, the installation process is quite complex. There are various components involved, including transformations, multiple installations, and containerization for various components. Ideally, I'd recommend that ArcSight allow the entire installation, including the ESM and database, to be completed within a single unified setup process for a streamlined experience. Additionally, having readily available and well-organized documentation for the step-by-step installation process would be incredibly helpful. I would also like to see better support.
Frank Eargle - PeerSpot reviewer
A highly scalable solution that is easy to manage and super easy to set up
We use Snare for picking up Windows logs, and we used to use it for SQL as well. We had used it for Linux once or twice. We're mainly using it for Windows and Windows flat files The most valuable feature of Snare is flexibility or the ability to filter all things you don't want and don't have…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of ArcSight ESM are ease of use and readily usable components."
"This process has helped to improve our organization because we have centralized the intra-group security equipment logs."
"The webpage algorithm is the most valuable feature because it was the fastest feature for searching the logs, events, and correlation."
"The real-time analysis adds value."
"It is a very useful tool for intelligence building because it has many use cases and many rule sets."
"ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is very cheap compared to other tools."
"The filters and the ability to do what you want are the most valuable features. There is nothing that you cannot do in this solution. It has all the features, which makes it very dynamic."
"The reports that we are from getting from ArcSight are very valuable. The reporting in ArcSight is good. Our regulators ask us for the reports on a regular basis, and we have been able to provide the required data. Its overall functionality in terms of log analysis and the speed at which it does that is also valuable. It is very quick. Whatever alerts we had configured were extremely fast. We immediately get alerts when there is unauthorized access or unknown access, or even positive access. This is where we found the difference between ArcSight and other solutions."
"Snare has good agents, especially for Windows."
"The most valuable feature of Snare is flexibility or the ability to filter all things you don't want and don't have security value."
"The best thing about Snare is its format and consistency."
 

Cons

"It is quite complex and could use a better UI. So the improvement would be a simplification. It is pretty complicated to use. The architecture is not complex but the setup and use are."
"The way that scaling is set up isn't very cost-effective."
"The weakness in this system comes about because, with so many different logs, it is possible that the security analyst will lose information."
"The roadmap is not clear."
"ArcSight ESM needs to improve performance, user interface, and automation."
"They should try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the SIEM tool."
"When we need to consume old events, we have to wait for a long time. ArcSight should improve the database capability to reply to queries faster. It would also be interesting if they implemented network visibility. For example, they could add a feature like NetWitness with a model just for looking through the packets."
"They need to develop NetFlow appliances that can be installed in the customer network on span ports, collect NetFlow, and send it to ArcSight without relying on the devices' NetFlow capability and their position in the network."
"Users will initially find it difficult to identify the event types and installation in Snare."
"Snare should modernize its GUI a little bit."
"The solution is now developing a SIEM-like feature on Snare Central Server, but it's not complete yet."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is great compared to others."
"It's a good price, it's one of the cheaper solutions."
"We have a license to use this solution. The price of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager is expensive."
"The product licenses are inexpensive."
"The licensing cost is affordable if you get an enterprise license. The licensing is based on EPS, so you can probably provide a package of license for multiple ESMs with their correlational end fees. It is cost-effective."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"We're paying a fee for an MSSP, and the cost of the total cost of ArcSight ESM was approximately three to four million dollars a year. The price was less than similar solutions. We did not have additional fees."
"Thanks to Micro Focus's licensing model, as an MSSP, we are able to see a complete return on our investment almost immediately."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate Snare's pricing a four out of ten."
"Snare has reasonable pricing."
"Snare is a cheap solution because a lot of customers are using it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Jun 28, 2015
Qradar vs. ArcSight
Continuing with the SIEM posts we have done at Infosecnirvana, this post is a Head to head comparison of the two Industry leading SIEM products in the market – HP ArcSight and IBM QRadar Both the products have consistently been in the Gartner Leaders Quadrant. Both HP and IBM took over niche SIEM…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Performing Arts
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business37
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise57
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the best SIEM tool for a mid-sized financial services firm: Arcsight or Securonix?
In my market, a lot of financial companies had or have an ArcSight installation. Just because in former times it was pretty good. Now a lot of them are looking for a more effective solution due to ...
What do you like most about ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM)?
We utilize ArcSight ESM for real-time threat detection in our organization. We have custom rules that we've developed on top of the WAN services, along with scheduled licensing activities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM)?
ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is very cheap compared to other tools. It is worth the investment if you are considering the cost.
What do you like most about Snare?
The best thing about Snare is its format and consistency.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Snare?
Snare is a cheap solution because a lot of customers are using it.
What needs improvement with Snare?
Users will initially find it difficult to identify the event types and installation in Snare.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus ArcSight, HPE ArcSight, ArcSight
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lake Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bank AlJazira, Banca Intesa, and Obrela.
Military, Defence and Security Agencies, Banking Finance and Insurance companies, Retail, Health and Utilities.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Enterprise Security Manager vs. Snare and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.