We compared Splunk Enterprise Security and LogPoint across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Splunk Enterprise Security stands out for its efficiency, extensive integration options, and powerful search functionality. Users say Splunk is a highly scalable and customizable solution. LogPoint is noted for its advanced technology and extensive log-collection, parsing, and analysis mechanisms.
Room for Improvement: Splunk users recommended improvements in AI capabilities, user-friendliness, and analytics. LogPoint can improve its dashboard customization, resource efficiency, network hierarchy diagrams, and agent deployment.
Service and Support: While some users found Splunk support to be responsive and helpful, others reported slow response times and a lack of expertise. LogPoint's customer service receives high marks for its exceptional technical support and responsive engineers, but some users reported delays in receiving help from higher-level support.
Ease of Deployment: 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. The complexity of LogPoint's initial setup can range from complex and time-consuming to fast and easy, depending on the user's experience and the organization’s size.
Pricing: 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. LogPoint's fixed pricing model is seen as cost-effective and competitive.
ROI: 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. Logpoint makes costs more predictable and enables companies to generate revenue through security operation services.
Comparison Results: Splunk is highly regarded for its efficient data processing and powerful search capabilities. Users like Splunk's customization options and ability to process data from multiple sources quickly, but reviewers say it could be more intuitive and offer advanced AI capabilities. Logpoint excels at log collection and analysis but would benefit from improvements in its user interface and resource usage.
"It is always correlating to IOCs for normal attacks, using Azure-related resources. For example, if any illegitimate IP starts unusual activity on our Azure firewall, then it automatically generates an alarm for us."
"Mainly, this is a cloud-native product. So, there are zero concerns about managing the whole infrastructure on-premises."
"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."
"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 UI of Sentinel is very good and easy to use, even for beginners."
"The AI and ML of Azure Sentinel are valuable. We can use machine learning models at the tenant level and within Office 365 and Microsoft stack. We don't need to depend upon any other connectors. It automatically provisions the native Microsoft products."
"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."
"Another area where it is helping us is in creating a single dashboard for our environment. We can collect all the logs into a log analytics workset and run queries on top of it. We get all the results in the dashboard. Even a layman can understand this stuff. The way Microsoft presents it is really incredible."
"What I like best about LogPoint is its cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions. LogPoint also has better dashboards which I find valuable. I also like that you can create use cases based on your assets."
"It is a very comprehensive solution for gathering data. It has got a lot of capabilities for collecting logs from different systems. Logs are notoriously difficult to collect because they come in all formats. LogPoint has a very sophisticated mechanism for you to be able to connect to or listen to a system, get the data, and parse it. Logs come in text formats that are not easily parseable because all logs are not the same, but with LogPoint, you can define a policy for collecting the data. You can create a parser very quickly to get the logs into a structured mechanism so that you can analyze them."
"The most valuable feature of LogPoint is that they have the SIEM and SOAR combined in one solution. They are not on a separate platform."
"We like the user and entity behaviour analytics (UEBA) and find it valuable."
"The main advantage of Logpoint is the support service. They reply within ten minutes to an hour to our queries."
"The most valuable features are the ones that we use the most, which are the search and report facilities."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"The search feature is valuable. The dashboards are also valuable for our bosses. Another valuable feature, which is the main feature of the product, is the centralization of all the logs."
"Splunk setup is easy and straightforward. "
"I like the ease with which dashboards can be created."
"Out-of-the-box, it seems very powerful."
"The data representation options in the dashboards are excellent."
"It scales better in the cloud than on-premise."
"Positive features include replication capabilities, software development kits, and the architecture."
"The most valuable feature of Splunk is the management and built-in workflows."
"You can run reports against multiple devices at the same time. You are able to troubleshoot a single application on a thousand servers. You can do this with a single query, since it is very easy to do."
"When we pass KPIs to the governance department, there's no option to provide rights to the data or dashboard to colleagues. We can use Power BI for this, but it isn't easy or convenient. They should just come up with a way to provide limited role-based access to auditing personnel"
"We are invoiced according to the amount of data generated within each log."
"Its documentation is not so simple. It is easy for somebody who is Microsoft certified or more closely attached to Microsoft solutions. It is not easy for those who are working on open-source platforms. There isn't a central point where everything is documented, and there is no specific training or certification."
"The learning curve could be improved. I am still learning it. We were able to implement the basic features to get them up and running, but there are still so many things that I don't know about all its features. They have a lot of features that we have not been able to use or apply. If they could work on reducing the solution's learning curve, that would be good. While there is a training course held by Microsoft to learn more about this solution, there is a cost associated with it."
"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."
"The on-prem log sources still require a lot of development."
"The solution could be more user-friendly; some query languages are required to operate it."
"Sentinel still has some anomalies. For example, sometimes when we write a query for log analysis with KQL, it doesn't give us the data in a proper way... Also, the fields or columns could be improved. Sometimes, it is not giving the desired results and there is a blank field."
"What could be improved in LogPoint is its UI because it's less friendly to users than LogRhythm. The UI could be more aesthetically appealing to users. It's completely outdated."
"The thing that makes it a little bit challenging is when you run into a situation where you have logs that are not easily parsable. If a log has a very specific structure, it is very easy to parse and create a parser for it, but if a log has a free form, meaning that it is of any length or it can change at any time, handling such a log is very challenging, not just in LogPoint but also in everything else. Everybody struggles with that scenario, and LogPoint is also in the same boat. One-third of logs are of free form or not of a specific length, and you can run into situations where it is almost impossible to parse the log, even if they try to help you. It is just the nature of the beast."
"LogPoint can improve its dashboards. We are not able to customize the dashboard when creating them. They only have preset dashboards which do not have exactly what we are looking for."
"One of the things we faced last year was that we had some memory issues with the server running. We were running them as virtual services, and we were facing some performance issues. Back then, there were some things that had already been solved at the end, but one of the small issues we had was that it was quite memory-consuming. After one upgrade that we did, we faced some performance issues."
"One of the downsides is it is not a SaaS solution. It must be on-premises."
"It is a good product, but its interface or GUI could be better."
"Sometimes, the product is not stable."
"The solution should offer more integrations and third-party solutions like incident response platforms or allow access to third-party big data"
"We usually have to follow up with technical support on our open cases."
"The UI can be difficult to understand for non-technical people."
"The prices are complicated as we operate in a small third-world country."
"It needs to improve the way to install third-party apps and enable installation without logging into splunk.com."
"Its search or filtering capability is nice, but it can be improved. It is currently a bit complicated, and it should be simplified. If we can write the search filter in a more simplified way, it would be better."
"Splunk needs local technical support."
"We do have to educate developers on how to not blow it up. It is a little to easy to write an expensive query and overly stress the system. This could be improved."
"When you get into large amounts of data, Splunk can get pretty slow. This is the same on-premise or AWS, it doesn't matter. The way that they handle large data sets could be improved."
Logpoint is ranked 29th in Log Management with 20 reviews while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 1st in Log Management with 240 reviews. Logpoint is rated 7.4, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Logpoint writes "Good technical support but it is complex to use and resource-heavy". 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 ". Logpoint is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security, Rapid7 InsightIDR, Wazuh and SolarWinds Security Event Manager , whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security and Datadog. See our Logpoint vs. Splunk Enterprise Security report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors and best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.