We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Wazuh based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: IBM Security QRadar users say the solution provides extensive information and helpful leads for locating pertinent data. Wazuh stands out for its effortless integration, excellent log monitoring capabilities, and ELK-based investigation. IBM Security QRadar could improve its rule deployment and lower its false positive rate. Users would also like expanded storage capacity, streamlined user management, and a more mature architecture. Wazuh needs improvements in event source coverage, threat intelligence integration, and real-time monitoring of Unix systems.
Service and Support: Some customers of IBM Security QRadar have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. Wazuh's customer service is generally deemed satisfactory, and many customers noted that they could easily find answers from community forums.
Ease of Deployment: IBM Security QRadar's initial setup can be complex for users without expertise, and the difficulty may vary depending on the size of the data set. Some users said that Wazuh’s setup is easy and fast, while others perceived it as complicated and said it required a significant amount of time.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. Wazuh is a cost-effective option as it is open-source and completely free to acquire.
ROI: IBM Security QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. Wazuh's MSP program and partnerships offer opportunities to generate revenue from the platform.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer IBM Security QRadar over Wazuh. The advanced security features and overall strength of QRadar make it the favored option. Users like QRadar's extensive and actionable insights, user-friendly interface, and adaptability. QRadar offers a comprehensive overview of network activity and risk management.
"The integration with other Microsoft solutions is the most valuable feature."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a stable solution."
"I like Defender XDR's automation capabilities. XDR isn't automated by default, but you can automate it to respond. If an attack is performed anywhere within the organization, you can isolate that instance from the network. This is what I can figure out for it. When integrated with Sentinel, you can set up playbooks to automate all the alerts gathered on Sentinel from different Microsoft solutions. Sentinel has a wider range of capabilities than XDR."
"Many people don't realize that Microsoft Azure, Exchange Online, and the security and compliance portal all sync together. For instance, within the Azure portal you can set security restrictions and policies to help secure your tenants... The good part of it is that these products have already been integrated. When you sign on as an admin you have global admin rights and that gives you access to all these features."
"Within advanced threat hunting, the tables that have already been defined by Microsoft are helpful. In the advanced threat hunting tab, there were different tables, and one of the tables was related to device info, device alert, and device events. That was very helpful. Another feature that I liked but didn't have access to was deep analysis."
"The integration, visibility, vulnerability management, and device identification are valuable."
"We can use Defender to block and monitor for security purposes without needing multiple other products to do different tasks."
"The most valuable feature is probably the aggregation and correlation of the different telemetry points with Defender for Identity, Defender for Endpoint, and Defender for Cloud Apps. All of these various things are part of that portal. We've wanted that single pane of glass for years."
"Vulnerability detection is the most valuable feature. It's the tool that finds the threats."
"One very useful feature is the plug-in offering that allows you to integrate it with other solutions, such as integrating it with plug-ins like Scout, Carbon Black, and the rest."
"I have found visibility very helpful for analytics."
"IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson is a stable solution."
"The stability is good."
"This is a distributed application, meaning that a customer can stack small and then scale it so that they can expand pretty effectively. You can use, basically, the same product in an SMB or a large enterprise."
"The most valuable features are log monitoring, easy-to-fix issues, and problem-solving."
"It comes with many rules disabled. You can tune them and modify them according to your enterprise needs and avoid false positives."
"Wazuh automatically scans the host for CIS benchmarks for the latest updates and vulnerabilities and gives a host score. It provides a percentage of perceived risk due to of non patches or any missing patches on that work."
"The configuration assessment and Pile integrity monitoring features are decent."
"The deployment is easy and they provide very good documentation."
"It's very easy to integrate Wazuh with other environments, cloud applications, and on-prem applications. So, the advantage is that it's easy to implement and integrate with other solutions."
"Wazuh offers numerous features, such as the ability to define custom rules for detecting malicious activities and remembering behaviors."
"I like that the solution is on top of the Kubernetes stack."
"The most valuable features are the modules and metrics."
"Wazuh's most beneficial features for our security needs are flexibility, built-in rules, integration capabilities, and documentation."
"Because of the training model, Defender XDR's automatic response sometimes blocks legitimate users and activities. Also, the UI sometimes responds slowly."
"The interface could be improved. For example, if you want to do a phishing simulation for your employees, it can take a while to figure out what to do. The interface is a bit messy and could be updated. It isn't too bad, but doing some things can be a long process."
"The documentation on their website is somewhat outdated and doesn't show properly. I wanted to try a query in Microsoft Defender 365. When I opened the related documentation from the security blog on the Microsoft website, the figures were not showing. It was difficult to understand the article without having the figures. The figures were there in the article, but they were not getting loaded, which made the article obsolete."
"I personally have not seen much evidence of how Defender can enhance the story of zero trust for enterprises."
"The tool gives inconsistent answers and crashes a lot."
"There are a few technical issues with Defender XDR that can be improved. Sometimes, the endpoint devices are not reporting properly to the Defender 365 portal. When you're getting all the information from the Microsoft portal, the devices are sometimes not in sync. We have hundreds of endpoint devices, some needing to be onboarded again."
"Offboarding latency should be reduced. Even after a device has been successfully offboarded using a particular offboarding script, it still shows up as onboarded."
"In the future, it would be beneficial for Microsoft to consider making the product more user-friendly or simplified for those who are interested in using it. Currently, it requires a high level of technical expertise, making it challenging for beginners or less experienced individuals."
"Needs better visualization options beyond the time series charts and a few other options that they have."
"The reporting system could use some upgrading."
"The solution is expensive compared to other products."
"The IBM support can be better."
"There is one problem with QRadar in regards to the add-on apps. The apps can be frustrating. For example, when I add a big app like one of the add-ons for resiliency, add-on applications for QRadar, these applications require different hardware to implement and to deploy. The resiliency connector because there's a considerable amount of data scanning, operates for these apps correctly."
"Maybe there should be more custom rules in the exchange. Basically, we are using a lot of threat rules, so maybe they'll develop something like that."
"Search capability and indexing still lag behind competitors. We also need to see improved rule based access controls and rule/event tuning."
"Do your research before implementing it, because it is tough to implement."
"The biggest part that's missing is threat intelligence. It isn't inbuilt, and if a sudden incident occurs, we don't get that feedback inside the SIEM tool. That's a big gap, I see. It would be better if we could get the threat intelligence feeds integrated with the SIEM tools. That would help us push value solutions to the clients in a big way."
"The tool does not provide CTI to monitor darknet."
"Wazuh needs more security and features, particularly visualization features and a health monitor."
"They could include flexibility and customization capabilities by modifying for customers based on partner agreements."
"There could be a hardware monitoring tool for the solution."
"A more structured approach, perhaps with modular UI components, to facilitate easier integration and navigation within the Wazuh platform for custom integrations would be beneficial."
"One area where Wazuh could use some improvement is in its reporting mechanism, especially for high-level management like CSOs and CEOs."
"Adding the flexibility to integrate various plug-ins or modules into its core system would enhance functionality."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while Wazuh is ranked 2nd in Log Management with 38 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Wazuh is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wazuh writes "It integrates seamlessly with AWS cloud-native services". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Sentinel, whereas Wazuh is most compared with Elastic Security, Security Onion, Splunk Enterprise Security, AlienVault OSSIM and USM Anywhere. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Wazuh report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors, best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.
