When comparing with Splunk, IBM Security QRadar's cost is reasonable. Splunk is more expensive than IBM Security QRadar.

The pricing, setup cost, or licensing with IBM Security QRadar was costly. It was costly mainly for the things we used to use it for. The customers used to pay the price, but it was one of the problems to onboard some people with IBM Security QRadar. It was costly mainly because of the value you can get right now compared to other solutions.

The cost depends. The price I negotiated varies by region and relationship with the OEM. Cost is not shared due to another procurement team handling negotiations, but it was reasonable as far as I know.

IBM solutions are always expensive, as it offers some industry-leading solutions, which is why we have implemented them. Now, locally developed and open-source solutions like Wazuh are available. Certain organizations are deploying the solutions. We receive no cost-benefit from IBM. It is an expensive solution, and we have to incur these costs.

The tool's price is high. Our company faces pricing-related challenges with locally available products and other offerings like Splunk and Wazuh. In addition, there is a need to pay the tool's standard licensing fee. We outsource our SOC operations, so such expenses are in addition to the deployment.

As for licensing costs, I haven't seen the exact figures, but it is considered somewhat costly. On a scale from one to ten, where one is very expensive and ten is very cheap, I would rate it a six—it’s costly but worth the money.

The price is lower than Splunk but remains high compared to other SIEMs like LogRhythm, Elastic, and RSA. For example, 1,000 EPS costs around $55,000. While it's somewhat more affordable than Splunk, it is still higher than LogRhythm, Elastic, and RSA.

IBM Security QRadar is about 50% less expensive than Splunk. SIEM solutions charge by the amount of data, whether EPS or gigabytes. They directly incentivize you not to put things in it, which doesn't make sense since the goal is to put everything in it. They'd make it where you can't afford to do it.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate IBM Security QRadar's pricing a five out of ten.

Overall, I'm satisfied with the value IBM QRadar provides for its price. However, there is room for improvement in terms of including more features with the base license instead of requiring additional licensing fees for each feature or application.

The tool is priced in a competitive manner. The tool's price is dependent on the installation and the product size, but it is competitive in the marketplace. The marketplace right now is being set by Splunk, which offers a pretty good deal if someone wants it. As a matter of fact, I would say that out of who we are working with right now, Splunk is the major one.

The solution's pricing is based on the EPS model. 

The tool's on-premise version is expensive. However, it is cheaper than Splunk. The hybrid model offers shared instances for customers, which is not expensive. Customers with a limited budget can opt for it. You can get premium support with licenses. However, if you need customized integration, you need to buy it. 

IBM Security QRadar is a very expensive tool.

In India, the solution is expensive. Only enterprise businesses can afford the tool. We need more than 3000 people in the organization to use it. We might have to pay for technical support separately.

The solution is costly and the price differs depending on the vendor you use.

The solution has a licensing model that is based on events per second so it scales to need and budget. 

At the time of deployment, we were premium partners with IBM so received advantageous pricing. 

The on-premises solution and its license are not impacted by the number of users so it is easy to add staff. 

I think the pricing is quite flexible. As a reseller, we had chances to win bids with IBM Security QRadar against Splunk, ArcSight, and even McAfee with better pricing around six or seven years ago. We won the deals with better pricing. Pricing could be flexible. It could depend on the number of assets used by the enterprise or on the number of events per second, allowing customers to choose what fits him or her the best.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate the price a one, where one is an extremely expensive product, and ten is a cheap product. IBM Security QRadar is an expensive product. A customer gets discounts only when they ask for them from IBM.

The challenge is that if someone submits a request or proposal and finds that the prices of the products our company deals with are too high, we may not even be shortlisted for negotiations. If my company gets shortlisted for the next round, then we get questioned over the high prices.

The pricing is higher but cheaper than others and there are no additional costs.

I do not know the exact cost. It's a bit tricky as some of it is tied into pre-contracts that we have. Some parts of the company do prepaid funds for certain solutions. It's different. It varies.

I have no idea what QRadar UBA costs as a standalone solution because it is bundled with the QRoC security operation center and several other modules that we pay for in a big lump sum. However, I don't think that part is too expensive. It's a plugin to the QRadar SIEM that feeds off the same data. We have X-Force Threat Exchange, so IBM is operating the SIEM for us. I say to them, "I want UBA," and there it is.

You have a one-time payment, and you also can purchase it for one year as a subscription. We have it on-premise, and we have a permanent license for it. We have to pay for the support on a yearly basis.

If you compare its cost with Sentinel for one year, QRadar would seem more expensive, but if you compare its cost over five or ten years, Azure Sentinel will be more expensive than QRadar.

Licensing is mostly dependent on the EPS, events per second. Depending upon the number of products that are integrated with the platform, we have to come to an optimal EPS value. I'm not very sure about the financials, however, the licensing cost cannot be as much as that for Sentinel, which is not very low. For customers who need medium EPS values, we advise QRadar.

The basic out the box cost covers, the EPS value that you have specified, and then some archiving maybe. It should include at least six months of archiving and other functionalities. Most of the customers will go for the standard package and we don't have to go for extra archival or enhanced DPS. 10% to 15% of DPS can always be increased. It will not completely shut down the system, however, it'll start sending us notifications that the DPS is getting increased and then we can go for a higher licensing.

We pay approximately $40,000 to use the solution annually. This solution is a lot less expensive than Splunk.

QRadar is reasonable compared to LogRhythm.

They can give us some scalability and flexibility on pricing. If its pricing can be reduced, it would help a lot of customers in bringing in a new SIEM environment and grow business in the market. If I start a license today and take around 10,000 EPS, and after a month, there is an increase in the number of clients on my platform, I can increase the number of licenses. I can add 5,000 EPS on a yearly basis.

It's very expensive but it fits our budget. Because it's very expensive, we had to come up with ways of filtering our logs before they get into QRadar because otherwise, we'd have to buy a much greater amount of events per second, and that would be very expensive.

Splunk is virtually the same price.

The product is expensive. We have purchased the perpetual license, but we pay for the support. 

IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is an application framework and you can install many applications without any additional costs.

I rate the price of IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics a four out of five.

This is a free solution which is one of the main reasons we chose it. It's just a matter of getting a license for the curator as a platform.

I'm an architect. Normally costs and licensing are handled by senior management.

For UBA, they haven't asked for any extra charges or anything. It's included in the licensing.

Pricing is good.

I pay for licensing yearly. 

We pay an annual license fee. On top of that, every model adds to the cost. It's not just the license; the sales people want you to think you're only paying for certain things but we know how it works. 

It is overly expensive and overly complex in terms of licensing. They have many different appliances, which makes it extremely difficult to choose the technology. It is very difficult to choose the technology or QRadar components that you should be deploying. 

They have improved some of it in the last few years. They have made it slightly easy with the fact that you can now buy virtual versions of all the appliances, which is good, but it is still very fragmented. For instance, on some of the smaller appliances, there is no upgrade path. So, if you exceed the capacity of the appliance, you have to buy a bigger appliance, which is not helpful because it is quite a major cost. If you want to add more disks to the system, they'll say that you can't. If they ship a disk with 2 terabytes that the older appliances have, and you say to them that you can commercially get 10 terabyte disks, they will say this is not possible, even though there is no technical reason why it cannot be done. So, they're not very flexible from that point of view. For IBM, it is good because you basically have to buy new appliances, but from a customer's point of view, it is a very expensive investment.

It could be cheaper, but the value itself is far more important for us than the price. Typically, our clients have yearly subscriptions.

IBM QRadar is pricey, and therefore, usually small enterprises are not able to afford it. Usually, probably most of the customers are usually large enterprises.

The pricing of the solution is quite reasonable.

The license is not subscription-based. We have been doing the same deployment for more than ten years. 

The pricing is alright. 

As compared to LogRhythm, IBM QRadar's pricing is moderate.

IBM Qradar has an interesting scheme for payments. They have annual payments for customers who use subscriptions for some services. I can't see any problem with the current financial scheme for this product generally. It's okay.

The solution is priced fairly, there is a license for the solution, and we pay annually.

The product is not a cheap solution. it's quite expensive.

We do also pay more in order to use Watson.

Customers have to purchase a license based on the number of users, devices, and applications they want to protect. It allows you to take a license on a subscription basis for three years or five years.

We use QRadar as a managed service and we pay licensing fees to the partner.

Our licensing is yearly. But it's based on Event Per Second, which is one of the models. Storage capacity for log management is also considered with the fees. Licensing is a bit complex in IBM, as well. Different aspects needs to be considered.

I think that the price is fair, but we can always say that the price could be cheaper.

It is costlier as compared to the other alternatives available in the market.

The price can be expensive, however, it's all relative, as it helps speed up development, which can save money for the organization. 

The payments for the product are made on a yearly basis.

The IBM QRadar Licensing for the core Events(EPS) and Flows(FPS) is per second based. The licensing is perpetual and surely expensive but the output of the Product makes it worth your money. 

The price of this product is high.

I give the price of the solution a four out of ten. The solution comes with a high price tag, while some of the competitors provide identical functionality in their offerings at no extra cost.

The pricing is reasonable. It's not expensive compared to other solutions. If you get the console and other licenses, you can easily use it with other QRadar solutions. 

I rate the price a six out of ten, with ten being affordable and one being expensive. They recently changed their licensing model, and it's more complex.

I have no information about the licensing costs of IBM QRadar, and whether or not it requires a license.

It's a bit pricey as a product. I'd rate it a two out of five, with five being the most affordable. It depends on what you buy; the longer you use it, the better the cost. It's an all-inclusive license. You don't need to pay for extra features. 

I think my company pays for the license yearly.

There is an annual license required for this solution.

I can't speak to the exact pricing. I've never looked at its commercial costs. 

Licensing can be costly depending on your architecture.

There are different types of subscriptions available. We were on an annual subscription, but our customers typically choose the two years subscription option.

There is a license to use this solution, which is paid annually. However, there are subscription options available.

Licensing costs are reasonable.

SIEM is quite a pricey solution so we only offer it to enterprise companies that can pay the fees. For smaller companies, it's an extremely expensive product. 

The price could be better. I bought a subscription for three years. 

Implementation is over time and the maintenance price for QRadar is competitive.

On-premises is pretty expensive as opposed to the cloud. 

You do need to pay for a year subscription. You are charged at events per second as well. 

The price of this solution is reasonable.

The license is a yearly one.

There is a license required for this solution.

IBM QRadar is a little bit expensive compared to other products.

The pricing is always fine. 

This price is a little high, so it's an expensive product. It is a good solution but not a cheap one.

When compared with other SIEM solutions, QRadar is considerably less expensive. I would like to compare it with Elasticsearch because they have different pricing strategies.

QRadar is events per second, EPS-based, whereas Elasticsearch is resource-based. You have to estimate based on how many resources will be used in the infrastructure, irrespective of log resources and log volumes. 

They are charging based on the resources. 

There is a license required for this solution. There are some limitations depending on what license you purchase.

There is a license required for this solution and it is an annual payment. I have found all solutions in the category to be expensive, including Splunk.

The price of this solution is a little high.

When it comes to the initial pricing there can be a huge discount from there side and also I think they are open to competing with other products. Even though the price can be a little high sometimes there product is number one. They have a wide range of products.

The NEMA licensing structure is very easy. It's far better than the previous licensing structure they had. They charge you based on the number of events per second and flows per second, and that's the beauty of it. The rest of the components are complimentary. That's it. It's not a complex process of licensing anymore. It's very simple and straightforward.

It would be great if this product were cheaper.

Its price is good in terms of efficiency and the number of people required for implementing various things. You might pay more in terms of money, but you might save on the number of people. For example, if you are using Kibana, you have to pay more for people or experts, which is not the case with IBM QRadar.

I feel that the price is reasonable but compared to other products that are on the market, such as an offering by Microsoft, it is more expensive.

The pricing is okay, it's comparable to other vendors.

It's not expensive for the resources that it gives you.

It's free of charge.

Regarding the price, it is a bit high for normal customers. It is better for enterprise-class customers where they get a licensing model for MSSP for enterprises.

There are more costs in addition to standard licensing; support, building.

This is not a trivial undertaking. You will need at least one experienced user and considerable infrastructure to support this if you use the on-prem version which we did. The cloud version has less overhead but there are some limitations so choose carefully.

The price is very high. Some of our customers cannot afford it. 

The licensing is every year.

There are additional costs, such as the cost associated with the different hardware required for implementation and deployment. Along with the add-on apps, these are all additional costs, and they require licensing as well.

The solution is a subscription-based model. It is a yearly subscription from my understanding.

In terms of additional costs, it depends on the subscription that you choose. There are plenty of options to choose from.

There is the EPS licensing cost (Event per second licensing), which is a parameter that you choose. By adding countries to our solution, we have to increase the EPS.

Our licensing costs for this solution is on a yearly basis.

We do licensing on a yearly basis. It's for deployment. If the client wants more services, we support the license. There are no other costs for the product.

It's too expensive. The licensing is also a little bit difficult to understand because you have to license it per event and per number of flows. So you have to understand the difference between a flow and an event, and then you have to forward that to the resellers, the distributors, and to IBM. That part took a long time for us. Now we're adjusted to the process.

QRadar is quite expensive. It wouldn't be worth it for a small business unless, through a third-party company, they used it in a software-as-a-service type of arrangement, rather than buying the licenses outright.

There are additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees. For example, there are add-ons like the QRadar Vulnerability Manager.

We do licenses once a year. 

The licensing depends on the customer. The pricing is good.

IBM has subscriptions plans that run for one year.

Licensing is very expensive, IBM QRadar is a very expensive solution. If you want to minimize costs then IBM QRadar is not for you.

It's too expensive. 

It is cheaper than ArcSight. 

The cost of this product is expensive.

It is a pricey product. It is very expensive. 

I do not have control over pricing, though I do help customers with their sizing.

IBM is a Ferrari if you are beginning with a concept. If it will be a pilot project, take a look at Red Hat Process Automation Manager or jBPM. Be realistic about the users' quantity. A good approach would be to begin with an On Cloud subscription, then later on do a more exact sizing.

Pricing and licensing are competitive. Their new licensing options allow logs to bypass the correlation engine for a flat rate, which is also appealing for log data that is compliance-driven for a small amount of money.

Think what you will integrate into QRadar. It is a SIEM. You need to send it logs, but not everything.

Pricing (based on EPS) will be more accurate.

It is expensive. It is not a product that I can provide for SMBs. It is a program that I can only provide for really large enterprises.

Also, the maintenance costs are high.

Go through a vulnerability assessment review for price breaks. A virtualized solution will also cut down on cost.

It is a bit more expensive than some others, SIEM, but it is more efficient.

IBM's Qradar is not for small companie. Unfortunately, it would be 'overkill' to place it plainly. The pricing would be too much.

The pricing will definitely vary according to your EPS, but it is worth spending money on this product.

The pricing policy is a bit on the higher side. IBM offers discounts when applicable.

The pricing and licensing policies are really competitive. These solutions are not for a really small business, but having just one license variable is really good. You simple tell the partner or sales representative the number of EPS you want to receive in your appliance and that's it. Other solutions have a 'correlation' license, which is more like a trap than anything else.

Put some efforts and evaluate what license (EPS) you need for which collector before making an order. It is worth hiring a professional to do it for you (somebody who has experience with QRadar sizing).

QRadar is a very expensive application but it is a good product. My advice is to validate with other correlator solutions and validate which product is right for the organization.

Most of the time, it is easier and cheaper to buy a new product or the QRadar box. For example, with the QRadar Event Collector 1605, as and when you need to expand your EPS and the number of log sources; it’s much cheaper and the boxes usually ship with the default 1000 EPS and 750 log source limit. They have another advantage, i.e., the storage.

The pricing policy is good.

It's worth the cost. There are a lot of other options out there that are way more expensive, and that may be better in certain areas, but in my opinion, the overall best solution is QRadar.

You only need to worry about the number of events per second and the number of flows per minute. Storage size is not an issue with QRadar.

Licensing was simplified two months ago. I don’t have insight into pricing. But as with any software, the price can probably change depending on your negotiation skills :)

Do your due diligence. I found other solutions, with more features at the same cost or less. You don’t have to leave the Gartner Magic Quadrant to beat their price.

The solution is expensive compared to other products, and I rate the pricing a five out of ten.