We performed a comparison between Elastic Security and IBM QRadar based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: PeerSpot users feel IBM QRadar makes SIEM easy. It can pan through tremendous amounts of data quickly and the dashboards and monitoring are amazing, making it a user favorite.
"The visibility into threats is also very impressive because Microsoft helps you predict things and provides analytics to help you really improve your security. And all of this technology works across the domain, so it is pretty helpful in terms of threat analytics."
"The product integrates security into one tool instead of having third-party security tools."
"Having a single pane of glass for all Microsoft security services makes everything much easier. A security analyst can go to a single portal and see everything in one view. The integration of everything into one portal is a huge benefit."
"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."
"The best feature is threat hunting. There are a lot of other features I like, such as the alert mechanism. The chain alert mechanism has a huge impact. It combines all the alerts into one incident and automatically correlates them with AI."
"The solution is well integrated with applications. It is easy to maintain and administer."
"It provides a single pane of glass within the 365 admin interface, streamlining our experience by consolidating information in one place and eliminating the need to navigate through multiple interfaces."
"For me, the advanced hunting capabilities have been really great. It allowed querying the dataset with their own language, which is KQL or Kusto Query Language. That has allowed me to get much more insight into the events that have occurred. The whole power of 365 Defender is that you can get the whole story. It allows you to query an email-based activity and then correlate it with an endpoint-based activity."
"ELK is open-source, and it will give you the framework you need to build everything from scratch."
"The most valuable thing is that this solution is widely used for work management and research. It's easy to jump into the security use case with the same technology."
"The feature that we have found the most valuable is scalability."
"Elastic Security is very easy to adapt."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the prevention methods and the incident alerts."
"Enables monitoring of application performance and the ability to predict behaviors."
"What customers found most valuable in Elastic Security feature-wise is the search capability, in particular, the way of writing the search query and the speed of searching for results."
"The most valuable feature is the speed, as it responds in a very short time."
"The tool helps with infrastructure, application, and network monitoring."
"We run 65 servers globally with just two people: an engineering person and me."
"The visibility it gives you into your infrastructure has been great."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very stable, easy to get going, and easy to manage. It is also easy to review all incidents."
"A nice benefit is when we go to the process of selecting our youth cases, they go by building blocks. QRadar links it to building blocks."
"I have found the most important features to be the flexibility, tech framework, and disk manager."
"It's a state-of-the-art product for security information and event management (SIEM)."
"The threat protection network is the most valuable feature, because when you get an offense, you can actually trace it back to where it originated from, how it originated, and why."
"Advanced attacks could use an improvement."
"The cost can be high if you want to build custom license packages. Another area for improvement is the policies. In Azure, we need to implement policies in JSON format, but in 365 Defender 365, it would be helpful to use a different format so we can customize the platform."
"The support team is not competent or responsive."
"The solution does not offer a unified response and standard data."
"Microsoft Defender XDR is not a full-fledged EDR or XDR."
"From an integration standpoint, it is always improving overall. With Security Copilot coming out, as partners, we are waiting for the GDAP support so that we can actually see Security Copilot on behalf of customers if they subscribe to it."
"Because of the training model, Defender XDR's automatic response sometimes blocks legitimate users and activities. Also, the UI sometimes responds slowly."
"Generally, antivirus products provide a central control to manage every device in terms of who is installing it or who is trying to disable it, but Microsoft doesn't have such a control center for the antivirus product it provides."
"The biggest challenge has been related to the implementation."
"It is difficult to anticipate and understand the space utilization, so more clarity there would be great."
"This solution cannot do predictive maintenance, so we have to build our own modules for doing it."
"The setup process is complex. You need a solid working knowledge of networking, operating systems, and a little programming."
"The solution could also use better dashboards. They need to be more graphical, more matrix-like."
"We're using the open-source edition, for now, I think maybe they can allow their OLED plugin to be open source, as at the moment it is commercialised."
"Elastic Security can be a bit difficult to use if a person only has experience in SMBs with tools like Zoho. The product can also be difficult for those who have never dealt with query language."
"We'd like to see some more artificial intelligence capabilities."
"The quality of technical support depends on the IBM support person. Sometimes, it's hard to get the right person on the other side. A ticket coordinator could be the key to better quality delivery."
"There was some complexity in the initial setup due to bandwidth issues."
"The modularity could be improved."
"IBM Security QRadar’s GUI could be improved."
"Pricing model could be more cost-effective."
"IBM QRadar has a margin for development, for out-of-the-box use cases. It can be enhanced with better support and automate the use cases for that."
"You can scale IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics, but it has room for improvement."
"There could be improvements made to the UI, the user interface. Though the newer version, 7.3.2, might already have this improvement in place."
Elastic Security is ranked 5th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 59 reviews while IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews. Elastic Security is rated 7.6, while IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Elastic Security writes "A stable and scalable tool that provides visibility along with the consolidation of logs to its users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". Elastic Security is most compared with Wazuh, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Sentinel. See our Elastic Security vs. IBM Security QRadar report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors, best Log Management vendors, and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
