We performed a comparison between Devo and Exabeam Fusion SIEM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The UI of Sentinel is very good and easy to use, even for beginners."
"The automation feature is valuable."
"Sentinel uses Azure Logic Apps for automation, which is really powerful. This allows us to easily automate responses to incidents."
"One of the most valuable features is that it creates a kind of a single pane of glass for organizations that already use Microsoft software. So, when they have things like Microsoft 365, it is very easy for them to kind of plug in or enroll those endpoints into the Azure Sentinel service."
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based."
"The ability of all these solutions to work together natively is essential. We have an Azure subscription, including Log Analytics. This feature automatically acts as one of the security baselines and detects recommendations because it also integrates with Defender. We can pull the sysadmin logs from Azure. It's all seamless and native."
"Sentinel has an intuitive, user-friendly way to visualize the data properly. It gives me a solid overview of all the logs. We get a more detailed view that I can't get from the other SIEM tools. It has some IP and URL-specific allow listing"
"The standout feature of Sentinel is that, because it's cloud-based and because it's from Microsoft, it integrates really well with all the other Microsoft products. It's really simple to set up and get going."
"The most useful feature for us, because of some of the issues we had previously, was the simplicity of log integrations. It's much easier with this platform to integrate log sources that might not have standard logging and things like that."
"The strength of Devo is not only in that it is pretty intuitive, but it gives you the flexibility and creativity to merge feeds. The prime examples would be using the synthesis or union tables that give you phenomenal capabilities... The ability to use a synthesis or union table to combine all those feeds and make heads or tails of what's going on, and link it to go down a thread, is functionality that I hadn't seen before."
"The real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"It's very, very versatile."
"The ability to have high performance, high-speed search capability is incredibly important for us. When it comes to doing security analysis, you don't want to be doing is sitting around waiting to get data back while an attacker is sitting on a network, actively attacking it. You need to be able to answer questions quickly. If I see an indicator of attack, I need to be able to rapidly pivot and find data, then analyze it and find more data to answer more questions. You need to be able to do that quickly. If I'm sitting around just waiting to get my first response, then it ends up moving too slow to keep up with the attacker. Devo's speed and performance allows us to query in real-time and keep up with what is actually happening on the network, then respond effectively to events."
"In traditional BI solutions, you need to wait a lot of time to have the ability to create visualizations with the data and to do searches. With this kind of platform, you have that information in real-time."
"Those 400 days of hot data mean that people can look for trends and at what happened in the past. And they can not only do so from a security point of view, but even for operational use cases. In the past, our operational norm was to keep live data for only 30 days. Our users were constantly asking us for at least 90 days, and we really couldn't even do that. That's one reason that having 400 days of live data is pretty huge. As our users start to use it and adopt this system, we expect people to be able to do those long-term analytics."
"Being able to build and modify dashboards on the fly with Activeboards streamlines my analyst time because my analysts aren't doing it across spreadsheets or five different tools to try to build a timeline out themselves. They can just ingest it all, build a timeline out across all the logging, and all the different information sources in one dashboard. So, it's a huge time saver. It also has the accuracy of being able to look at all those data sources in one view. The log analysis, which would take 40 hours, we can probably get through it in about five to eight hours using Devo."
"The user interface and the timelines they use are the most valuable features. The price model is very simple so that one can understand it easily and there are no surprises within it."
"The advanced analytics has a really great overview of user behavior."
"Timeline based analysis; good platform support"
"The setup is not difficult. It was easy."
"I have customers that like the EUBA functionality of it. The solution has the ability to build a session, basically. It pulls a lot of information together, for example, everything a user does in a specific timeframe. It's quite helpful."
"The most valuable feature of Exabeam Fusion SIEM is the easy-to-use user interface."
"The solution's initial setup process is easy."
"Exabeam Fusion SIEM has a good performance and more advantages than traditional solutions."
"Multi-tenancy, in my opinion, needs to be improved. I believe it can do better as a managed service provider."
"The solution could be more user-friendly; some query languages are required to operate it."
"They need to work with other security vendors. For example, we replaced our email gateway with Symantec, but we couldn't collect these logs with Azure Sentinel. Instead of collecting these logs with Azure Sentinel, we are collecting them on Qradar. We couldn't do it with Sentinel, which is a problem for us."
"I think the number one area of improvement for Sentinel would be the cost."
"Microsoft Sentinel should provide an alternative query language to KQL for users who lack KQL expertise."
"The reporting could be more structured."
"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."
"Sometimes, we are observing large ingestion delays. We expect logs within 5 minutes, but it takes about 10 to 15 minutes."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"My opinion on the solution's technical support is not as great as it could be because of the issues I have faced regarding the service management element."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."
"Some of the documentation could be improved a little bit. A lot of times it doesn't go as deep into some of the critical issues you might run into. They've been really good to shore us up with support, but some of the documentation could be a little bit better."
"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
"There are some issues from an availability and functionality standpoint, meaning the tool is somewhat slow. There were some slow response periods over the past six to nine months, though it has yet to impact us terribly as we are a relatively small shop. We've noticed it, however, so Devo could improve the responsiveness."
"We still have questions surrounding hardware deployment."
"The organzation is rigid and not flexible in the way they operate"
"They should provide detailed information about detecting phishing emails."
"They need to focus on more of the MITRE ATT&CK Framework and coverage. They claim they cover about 70 to 80%. I'm not sure if it's really quite that much, however."
"The initial setup of Exabeam Fusion SIEM is complex because it needs to integrate with the SIEM solution, but after this is complete it is straightforward."
"We had a large volume right from the beginning and they weren't quite prepared for that. That's something that they should think about when it comes to customers that have a large volume to start off with."
"Updating the new release of Exabeam Fusion SIEM takes time and slows our performance."
"I believe if it were more flexible it would be a better product."
Devo is ranked 17th in Log Management with 21 reviews while Exabeam Fusion SIEM is ranked 32nd in Log Management with 10 reviews. Devo is rated 8.4, while Exabeam Fusion SIEM is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Devo writes "Keeps 400 days of hot data, covers our cloud products, and has a high ingestion rate and super easy log integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Exabeam Fusion SIEM writes "Enables centralized log collection on a single platform". Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, LogRhythm SIEM, Wazuh and Elastic Security, whereas Exabeam Fusion SIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, Splunk User Behavior Analytics, Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and Gurucul UEBA. See our Devo vs. Exabeam Fusion SIEM 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.
