We performed a comparison between Quest InTrust and Splunk Enterprise Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Wazuh, Datadog and others in Log Management."I would rate the technical support very well as they are knowledgeable and quick to respond."
"Its dashboard is valuable. If you have a good knowledge of how to create a dashboard, you can create any dashboard related to cybersecurity. If fine-tuned, the alarms that are triggered for instant review are also very valuable and useful."
"If I need to integrate devices for logs, it is easier with Splunk. We can integrate different applications, network devices, and databases. It is also very rich in documents. It is the best."
"The scalability of the solution is amazing because it can collect a lot of data and you can have your own structure to monitor this data."
"What I really like is that even if you have already collected the data, you can extract fields and can build searches."
"It is user-friendly. It is more effective than other solutions. The support and help for troubleshooting and the documentation from Splunk make it very effective."
"The stock analysts and security people use one single dashboard (one single location) to check our logs."
"The most valuable feature is the incident dashboard, and the extensive use of correlation searches, which isn't available with a standard Splunk search package. This feature is important to me because it enables SOC analysts to do their job more efficiently and be able to investigate or mediate incidents at a faster pace."
"Visualizations are the best way to understand deviation techniques from the norm."
"It needs to have better reporting. "
"It was very complex. There was poor native correlation. "
"The training was mostly sales-focused, like how to monitor your sales. It was hard to then come back from doing the training and try to switch it to a cybersecurity focus because all the training we did was sales oriented. The basic training didn't really touch on any kind of cybersecurity use cases or anything like that. That would have been great to see in the training."
"Could be more user friendly."
"The UI could be better. This is applicable to Splunk in general. I know that a lot of people who get their hands on Splunk are hesitant to use it just because they find it overwhelming. There are a lot of options."
"Splunk can be an expensive solution. Technical support could be improved as well."
"We had some connections issues with the solution at the beginning."
"This is not really a monitoring solution."
"The ingestion happens quickly, so you can run up the data costs if you use the default settings. It isn't a problem for government agencies in the Saudi market, but many of the corporations in India are small or medium-sized enterprises that cannot afford that kind of ingestion system."
"We were inundated with the amount of alerts and alarms that we could get out of it. It is also a resource hog and we didn't have the resources to support it on-prem so we're taking it offline now."
Earn 20 points
Quest InTrust is ranked 57th in Log Management while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 1st in Log Management with 240 reviews. Quest InTrust is rated 8.0, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Quest InTrust writes "Technical support is knowledgeable and quick to respond". 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 ". Quest InTrust is most compared with Change Auditor for Windows File Servers and syslog-ng, whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security and Microsoft Sentinel.
See our list of best Log Management 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.
