We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and SolarWinds Security Event Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The UBA feature is the most valuable because you can see everything about users' activities."
"The stability is good."
"The flexibility is good in terms of pulling log files."
"There are more than 120 extensions in QRadar, which are easy to install and configure. These can improve your analysis of events."
"I really like the feature we have with the logs, that if there are any credit card numbers being used, like a PII, you can just use rejects and you can mask it. This is a really good feature in QRadar."
"Senses, tracks, and links significant incidents and threats."
"The tool's most valuable feature is log source management. It enables us to connect to various log sources, including content, authentications, or other customized integrations. These integrations can be tailored for use with other platforms that don’t already have built-in IBM add-ons."
"It helps us discover any threats with their alerts and tracking."
"SolarWinds is effective for server, network, and log monitoring. It's also good for IP address management. We also have a patch manager, but we're still working on getting that operational."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use for the end user."
"It's extremely easy to deploy."
"It performs network behavior monitoring, log monitoring, and disaster recovery monitoring."
"The out of the box reports and dashboard. It was easy to trim down these windows to something we could quickly use."
"SolarWinds is easy to configure, and it provides timely alerts."
"It's easy to build rules and actions based on the logs and event types we collect with the software."
"Certain updates—especially when using Azure—don't apply directly. Our engineering team must invest additional effort to implement these updates. However, the tool's cloud-based version poses no issues. However, upgrading the product can sometimes be challenging for on-premises instances."
"This solution is on-premise and many customers are moving to the cloud base solution."
"It would be better if it were more stable and more secure. The price for maintenance could be better. It's too high. In the next release, I think they should focus on the price and the operation."
"QRadar needs to be more specialized, along the lines of what other SIEM solutions are."
"Search capability and indexing still lag behind competitors. We also need to see improved rule based access controls and rule/event tuning."
"I would like to see a better GUI."
"Some of the cloud apps need improvement."
"What needs to be improved in IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is the user experience. It's not optimal. Some screens are a bit clunky. The solution needs to be more user-friendly."
"There are no multiple dashboards which would allow you to see information side-by-side."
"Under the new system, it is not upgradable the way they say. When you try to do an upgrade, it doesn't really work unless you dump everything and start from scratch. You lose a lot of your nodes. Whenever you set your nodes up and everything else, they don't want to bring those nodes back in, so you have to really go back and restructure all your nodes. I went from version 6.5 to version 6.6 and then to version 6.7. I then went to version 2019, and now it is version 2020. It would be good if we can upgrade without having to delete everything and start from scratch. They can maybe build more KPIs and other things for the dashboard. Some of the other systems already have built-in KPIs. SolarWinds is starting to catch up, but it is not there yet. They can include some of the business or industry standards for tracking the time, that is, the meantime to detect (MTTD) and the meantime to resolve (MTTR). They can also find a way to build a KPI that measures the number of instances of port scans experienced in a week or a month."
"We'd like more customization capabilities."
"I would like to have a more customizable dashboard."
"It can be difficult for users who are inexperienced with the solution."
"It won't tell you when your backups are failing, but it will give you hints when your database is running on full recovery."
"It is a very technical program. They can simplify it so that it isn't so hard to deal with."
"I don't think SolarWinds is scalable enough. It is somewhat limited when I need to deploy it across multiple environments in a distributed architecture."
More SolarWinds Security Event Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while SolarWinds Security Event Manager is ranked 20th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 24 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while SolarWinds Security Event Manager is rated 7.8. 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 SolarWinds Security Event Manager writes "A comprehensive network security with robust technical capabilities, effective threat response, and centralized management". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas SolarWinds Security Event Manager is most compared with ManageEngine Log360, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, Wazuh and Microsoft Defender XDR. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. SolarWinds Security Event Manager 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.