We compared Securonix Next-Gen SIEM and Splunk Enterprise Security across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Securonix Next-Gen SIEM offers extensive customization options and multiple advanced features, such as Spotter, which enables in-depth search and analysis. Splunk Enterprise Security stands out for its efficiency, extensive integration options, and powerful search functionality.
Room for Improvement: Securonix users highlighted the need for greater flexibility in modifying reports and templates and improved analytics and visualization. Users say Splunk needs improvements in AI capabilities, user-friendliness, and analytics.
Service and Support: Securonix has been praised for its effective support and timely problem resolution. While some users found Splunk support to be responsive and helpful, others reported slow response times and a lack of expertise.
Ease of Deployment: Some users found the Securonix Next-Gen SIEM setup to be straightforward, but others found it complex. Some users thought Splunk Enterprise Security was easy to deploy, while others found it challenging and needed assistance from Splunk engineers or third-party integrators.
Pricing: Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is competitively priced and more affordable than many SIEM solutions. Some users consider Splunk Enterprise Security to be expensive, but others said the price is reasonable. A few users expressed concerns about the cost of scaling up the solution and managing large volumes of data.
ROI: Users say Securonix Next-Gen SIEM offers a significant return on investment by streamlining infrastructure management and enhancing overall efficiency. Users said that it’s challenging to calculate an ROI for Splunk Enterprise Security, and the return varies depending on individual circumstances. While some users have observed a substantial ROI, others have not actively explored or been engaged in ROI conversations.
Comparison Results: Users appreciate Securonix's smooth onboarding process, flexibility in features and patches, and ability to manage infrastructure. However, Securonix should improve its visualization and reporting flexibility. Splunk is praised for its interoperability and powerful search features, but users say that Splunk should work on its performance issues and offer more advanced AI capabilities.
"Microsoft Sentinel provides the capability to integrate different log sources. On top of having several data connectors in place, you can also do integration with a threat intelligence platform to enhance and enrich the data that's available. You can collect as many logs and build all the use cases."
"It's easy to use. It's a very good product. It can easily ingest data from anywhere. It has an easily understandable language to perform actions."
"The solution offers a lot of data on events. It helps us create specific detection strategies."
"The automation rules and playbooks are the most useful that I've seen. A number of other places segregate the automation and playbook as separate tools, whereas Microsoft is a SIEM and SOAR tool in one."
"The main benefit is the ease of integration."
"If you know how to do KQL (kusto query language) queries, which are how you query the log data inside Sentinel, the information is pretty rich. You can get down to a good level of detail regarding event information or notifications."
"The AI capability is one of the main features of the solution because I believe that in the market, there are few solutions that are providing security solutions based on AI and machine learning."
"The most valuable features are its threat handling and detection. It's a powerful tool because it's based on machine learning and on the behavior of malware."
"The most valuable feature is that it works on user behavior and event rarities."
"[The solution has] incident-management or case-management functionality. If someone were to download a high number and we decided we needed to investigate it, I could open a case right in the tool. It would be able to directly reference the data that they downloaded and we could open and shut the case directly in the tool, as well as report from it."
"One of the most valuable features it has is the thread chaining. One of the common issues that we always had was the number of anomalies that we used to get and the number of alerts that we used to get. But with this approach of thread chaining, we've found the false-positive rate has decreased very significantly. That was something that we never could have achieved before."
"The user interface is easy to learn and navigate."
"The UEBA functionality indicates a lot about behaviors that are not found through a traditional SIEM. We have exploited that more than anything since we started using it."
"We can customize our use cases with the tools provided by Securonix. It is an excellent tool that can ingest data in different ways and is very flexible."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is their analytics platform where they have the open security data-link, which they introduced. This is typically different from the other vendors."
"There aren't any positive aspects of the solution. It was a complete failure. There are no redeeming features."
"It is quite extensible. It is a platform that we can build our use instead of each case instead of each case being limited or restricted to each capability. This is probably the best feature."
"The product has a good security posture."
"The solution is the market leader."
"The most valuable feature is the log aggregation, being able to scan through all of the logs."
"We can automatically suspend or terminate suspicious sessions."
"I haven't had the chance to properly sink my teeth into Enterprise Security but so far I like that they added the MITRE ATT&CK features."
"The breadth of the data sources that Splunk can ingest data from is broad and deep and it does an exemplary job at handling structured data."
"The initial setup is really straightforward. It's one of the easiest installations."
"There is room for improvement in entity behavior and the integration site."
"If I can use Sentinel offline at home and use it on a local network, it would be great. I'm not sure if I can use Sentinel offline versus the tools I have."
"We've seen delays in getting the logs from third-party solutions and sometimes Microsoft products as well. It would be helpful if Microsoft created a list of the delays. That would make things more transparent for customers."
"Microsoft Defender has a built-in threat expert option that enables you to contact an expert. That feature isn't available in Sentinel because it's a huge product that integrates all the technologies. I would like Microsoft to add the threat expert option so we can contact them. There are a few other features, like threat assessment that the PG team is working on. I expect them to release this feature in the next quarter."
"They could use some kind of workbook. There is some limitation doing the editing and creating the workbook."
"I would like Sentinel to have more out-of-the-box analytics rules. There are already more than 400 rules, but they could add more industry-specific ones. For example, you could have sets of out-of-the-box rules for banking, financial sector, insurance, automotive, etc., so it's easier for people to use it out of the box. Structuring the rules according to industry might help us."
"There is a wider thing called Jupyter Notebooks, which is around the automation side of things. It would be good if there are playbooks that you can utilize without having to have the developer experience to do it in-house. Microsoft could provide more playbooks or more Jupyter Notebooks around MITRE ATT&CK Framework."
"Improvement-wise, I would like to see more integration with third-party solutions or old-school antivirus products that have some kind of logging capability. I wouldn't mind having that exposed within Sentinel. We do have situations where certain companies have bought licensing or have made an investment in a product, and that product will be there for the next two or three years. To be able to view information from those legacy products would be great. We can then better leverage the Sentinel solution and its capabilities."
"A helpful feature would be an event export. A way to create more substantial summary reports would be nice."
"Parsing needs to be improved. Every time we integrate a new, specific data source, we face a lot of problems in parsing, even for the old data source."
"The incident response area should be improved."
"The analytics-driven approach for finding sophisticated threats and reducing false positives is positive and good, but the platform requires a more dynamic concept. Everything is a bit static."
"We have a lot of users who, because they're engineers and they're bringing down product data - where, at times, a top-level product could be 10,000 or 15,000 objects - it's difficult for us to determine what should be a concern and what shouldn't be a concern. We work with the Securonix folks to try to come up with better ways to identify that."
"Securonix could open up information regarding the indicators of compromise or cyber-threat intelligence database that they use. The idea is that they share what threats they are detecting."
"It takes too long to generate Spotter reports. For example, a 90-day report is around 100 megabytes. That takes a while, but a one-day report can be generated in a few seconds. We would be happy if they sped up the process."
"One aspect that could be improved is the pricing of the product in Brazil."
"The difficult part is related to integration with sources of data that are used to create the logs as this depends on the infrastructure of the client."
"The prices are complicated as we operate in a small third-world country."
"The tool itself is very difficult to configure. It's great for its number of inputs, for the different types of systems devices, and things that it could collect information from. To actually make good use of it, you need a fairly dedicated team of people that have some reasonably good programming or modeling skills to be able to do the things that you need to do with it. Whereas a lot of the other tools are better packaged for that, and so require a lot less training and a lot less dedication."
"It needs to improve the way to install third-party apps and enable installation without logging into splunk.com."
"Its reporting can be improved. That's the only complaint I have heard. I don't need the reporting part, but I know that other people in the organization need it."
"Being a SIEM solution with a centralized dashboard, we would like to have more options to customize it."
"Spam has different plugins but by default, the logs are not organized, it shows that there are roll-ups that are out of the box. I saw many plugins that can help improve or extend Splunk's functionality but I haven't tried any of them."
"Our two main complaints are about the difficulty of the initial setup and the licensing model."
Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 7th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 27 reviews while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 2nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 227 reviews. Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is rated 8.6, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Securonix Next-Gen SIEM writes "Spotter tool has helped us eliminate many hours required to manually create link analysis diagrams". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Splunk Enterprise Security writes "It has a drag-and-drop interface, so you don't need to know SQL or Java to construct a query ". Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, LogRhythm SIEM, Exabeam Fusion SIEM, USM Anywhere and Gurucul UEBA, whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security and Azure Monitor. See our Securonix Next-Gen SIEM vs. Splunk Enterprise Security report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.
