We performed a comparison between Devo and Wazuh based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Devo users praised the solution’s ability to ingest and store data in its original format and multi-tenancy feature. They also liked Devo’s community-driven content and code-based approach. Wazuh stands out for its effortless integration, excellent log monitoring capabilities, and ELK-based investigation. Devo could benefit from improved workflow integration and search features. Users say Devo’s agents could handle Windows event logs better, and the solution should overhaul its basic reporting mechanisms. Wazuh needs improvements in event source coverage, threat intelligence integration, and real-time monitoring of Unix systems.
Service and Support: Devo customers value their collaborative approach, responsiveness, and strong partnerships. Customers appreciate the ease of working with Devo and trust their support team. Wazuh's customer service is generally deemed satisfactory, and many customers noted that they could easily find answers from community forums.
Ease of Deployment: Devo's initial setup was deemed manageable, with users praising the ease of data onboarding as well as the availability of professional services and training. 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: Devo's pricing is considered fair and competitive with no hidden costs. However, reviewers recommend that Devo's pricing tiers should offer more flexibility. Wazuh is a cost-effective option as it is open-source and completely free to acquire.
ROI: Devo offers a substantial return on investment thanks to the solution’s superior data ingestion, scalability, and cost savings. Wazuh's MSP program and partnerships offer opportunities to generate revenue from the platform.
"One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based."
"Log aggregation and data connectors are the most valuable features."
"It is easy to implement (turn on) - does need a skilled analyst to develop queries and playbooks."
"The most valuable feature is the performance because unlike legacy SIEMs that were on-premises, it does not require as much maintenance."
"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."
"The analytics has a lot of advantages because there are 300 default use cases for rules and we can modify them per our environment. We can create other rules as well. Analytics is a useful feature."
"The most valuable feature is the onboarding of the workloads. You can see all that has been onboarded in your account on the dashboards."
"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."
"Scalability is one of Devo's strengths."
"It's very, very versatile."
"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."
"Devo helps us to unlock the full power of our data because they have more than 450 parsers, which means that we can ingest pretty much any type of log data."
"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"The alerting is much better than I anticipated. We don't get as many alerts as I thought we would, but that nobody's fault, it's just the way it is."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the ability that Devo has to ingest data. From the previous SIEM that I came from and helped my company administer, it really was the type of system where data was parsed on ingest. This meant that if you didn't build the parser efficiently or correctly, sometimes that would bring the system to its knees. You'd have a backlog of processing the logs as it was ingesting them."
"The user interface is really modern. As an end-user, there are a lot of possibilities to tailor the platform to your needs, and that can be done without needing much support from Devo. It's really flexible and modular. The UI is very clean."
"The deployment is easy and they provide very good documentation."
"One of the most beneficial features of Wazuh, particularly in the context of security needs, is the machine learning data handling capability."
"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."
"Its cost-effectiveness is the most valuable aspect."
"The most valuable features are the modules and metrics."
"Wazuh offers numerous features, such as the ability to define custom rules for detecting malicious activities and remembering behaviors."
"Wazuh is simple to use for PCI compliance."
"It's stable."
"In terms of features I would like to see in future releases, I'm interested in a few more use cases around automation. I do believe a lot of automation is available, and more is in progress, but that would be my area of interest."
"Documentation is the main thing that could be improved. In terms of product usage, the documentation is pretty good, but I'd like a lot more documentation on Kusto Query Language."
"The dashboards can be improved. Creating dashboards is very easy, but the visualizations are not as good as Microsoft Power BI. People who are using Microsoft Power BI do not like Sentinel's dashboards."
"The KQL query does not function effectively with Windows 11 machines, and in the majority of machine-based investigations, KQL queries are essential for organizing the data during investigations."
"The built-in SOAR is not really good out-of-the-box. The SOAR relies on logic apps and you almost need to have some kind of developer background to be able to make these logic apps. Most security people cannot develop anything..."
"The AI capabilities must be improved."
"There is a wider thing called Jupyter Notebooks, which is around the automation side of things. It would be good if there are playbooks that you can utilize without having to have the developer experience to do it in-house. Microsoft could provide more playbooks or more Jupyter Notebooks around MITRE ATT&CK Framework."
"The product can be improved by reducing the cost to use AI machine learning."
"The Activeboards feature is not as mature regarding the look and feel. Its functionality is mature, but the look and feel is not there. For example, if you have some data sets and are trying to get some graphics, you cannot change anything. There's just one format for the graphics. You cannot change the size of the font, the font itself, etc."
"Technical support could be better."
"Some basic reporting mechanisms have room for improvement. Customers can do analysis by building Activeboards, Devo’s name for interactive dashboards. This capability is quite nice, but it is not a reporting engine. Devo does provide mechanisms to allow third-party tools to query data via their API, which is great. However, a lot of folks like or want a reporting engine, per se, and Devo simply doesn't have that. This may or may not be by design."
"The overall performance of extraction could be a lot faster, but that's a common problem in this space in general. Also, the stock or default alerting and detecting options could definitely be broader and more all-encompassing. The fact that they're not is why we had to write all our own alerts."
"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."
"The price is one problem with Devo."
"An admin who is trying to audit user activity usually cannot go beyond a day in the UI. I would like to have access to pages and pages of that data, going back as far as the storage we have, so I could look at every command or search or deletion or anything that a user has run. As an admin, that would really help. Going back just a day in the UI is not going to help, and that means I have to find a different way to do that."
"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."
"Wazuh is missing many things that a typical SIEM should have."
"Wazuh doesn't cover sources of events as well as Splunk. You can integrate Splunk with many sources of events, but it's a painful process to take care of some sources of events with Wazuh."
"They need to go towards integrating with more cloud applications and not just OS like Windows and Linux."
"Wazuh needs more security and features, particularly visualization features and a health monitor."
"The computing resources are consuming and do not make sense."
"A lack of certain features creates limitations."
"While it is scalable, it can suffer from reduced latencies."
"Since it's an open-source tool, scalability is the main issue."
Devo is ranked 17th in Log Management with 21 reviews while Wazuh is ranked 2nd in Log Management with 38 reviews. Devo is rated 8.4, while Wazuh is rated 7.4. 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 Wazuh writes "It integrates seamlessly with AWS cloud-native services". Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and New Relic, whereas Wazuh is most compared with Elastic Security, Security Onion, Splunk Enterprise Security, AlienVault OSSIM and CrowdStrike Falcon. See our Devo vs. Wazuh 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.
