We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Logsign Next-Gen SIEM 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."It has a good integration with the artificial intelligence engine of Watson."
"We have the abilities to monitor each instance which originates on the process along with the performance of each department."
"It is a pretty solid product for the type that it is representing. It is a CM solution as compared to Splunk or ArcSight from HP. It is also user friendly. It comes with some internal AI as well, in which it automatically maps multiple lots from unrelated devices and makes a smart decision to link them back and create an offense based on that. It is a smart tool."
"I have found the most important features to be the flexibility, tech framework, and disk manager."
"I have used IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics in a Cloud Pak on Amazon, and there it runs on top of it and is easy to assess. Additionally, I have installed processes and characters."
"On the back-end, Watson helps me figure out an exact problem, sometimes giving me the result."
"The flexibility is good in terms of pulling log files."
"The ability to add extensions is the most valuable feature. For example, extensions that provide valuable test ports."
"The most valuable features of Logsign SIEM are its cloud capabilities, alerting functionality, integration with Elastic Search, and configuration options."
"Logsign provides sample logs within the product, allowing users to see how logs will appear before integration, which is a valuable feature for testing and understanding log formats."
"The reporting system could use some upgrading."
"The user interface is a bit clunky, a bit hard to find what you need."
"I would like the rule creation interface to be much more user-friendly in the next release."
"There is room for improvement in IBM QRadar in integrating features for SOC maturity and security levels directly into QRadar."
"It's resource-intensive."
"The solution could improve by having more out-of-the-box use cases."
"There are areas in IBM Security QRadar that could benefit from improvement. Its ability to customize knowledge for specific purposes could be enhanced. Also, it lacks clarity in presenting details. It is also difficult to see the reports."
"The AQL queries could be better."
"Improvements needed in Logsign SIEM are providing specific security alerts that can be filtered and configured more effectively."
"I hope they address the pricing model for Logsign Next-Gen SIEM, especially regarding regional variations. The pricing should not differ based on the country of operation as it can lead to dissatisfaction among customers. A fixed pricing structure would be more favorable for us. I would also suggest enhancing the GUI interface and adding features similar to xFi Exchange from IBM Pure. This would streamline operations and save time for analysts."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while Logsign Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 36th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 3 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Logsign Next-Gen SIEM is rated 7.6. 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 Logsign Next-Gen SIEM writes "Easy to use and find the features that you need". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas Logsign Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with Grafana Loki, Wazuh, Logpoint and ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Logsign Next-Gen SIEM report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors and best Log Management 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.