We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and ManageEngine Log360 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."What I like about IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is that it uses machine learning algorithms to generate risk scoring for the user activity. I also like that it syncs with our Active Directory users, so it really has full coverage for all users in our environment."
"Due to the skills shortage, we are able to use it from the standpoint of bringing in a lower level employee or a person who may not have security knowledge."
"I have found visibility very helpful for analytics."
"It has a lot of good correlation rules. From a customer's point of view, it is one of the best solutions because you don't need to create correlation rules from scratch. You just review them and customize them as you want."
"It's a state-of-the-art product for security information and event management (SIEM)."
"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."
"The most valuable features are log monitoring, easy-to-fix issues, and problem-solving."
"This is a good tool to have because it gives you the ability to track what is currently happening in your environment."
"The most valuable feature is that this solution is more secure than others, and there are more applications and features as well."
"The most valuable features for us are the application logs monitoring and the dashboard, which provides a single-pane view of all the ongoing activities."
"ManageEngine Log360 is not difficult to deploy."
"It is easier to deploy than are other SIEMs, which is great. You can also get an overview of your environment, which is very handy."
"It basically helps us. We have to stay in compliance with certain issues with some of our customers. We have to have these types of tools in place for protecting our network and our data. We're in the aerospace industry, so we have a lot of defense contracts. So, all those guys will make sure that we're protecting their information, and it does a good job in that aspect."
"The solution could be improved by including XDR, remediation and Sandbox."
"The reporting is great. Everything you need is in the report for you already."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"If you have too many events that occur, then the storage capacity becomes a problem. You need to have more storage."
"Each module requires a separate license and a separate cost."
"The solution should include remote action capabilities."
"The implementation and configuration are not easy."
"There should be easier and wider integration opportunities. There should be more opportunities for integration with CTI info sharing areas. On platforms where you exchange CTI, there should be more visibility connected to what we share, what we can reach, or what options are connected to CTI info sharing. This is one area where they could add value because we cannot integrate it easily with QRadar. If a client has a legacy or already existing solutions for CTI, we cannot ask them to forget it because we cannot guarantee that QRadar is able to deliver everything connected to this area."
"I have noticed a few things while working on this. After the restart of the server, sometimes, the services misbehave, and you need to manually start or restart the service. I have seen that specifically with the Tomcat service. Sometimes, when you click on log sources, instead of opening the log source extension, it redirects you over the internet."
"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."
"The solution is difficult to understand in the beginning and has complex management configurations that can be improved."
"There is room for improvement, especially in the reporting aspect. The reports are not as good as those in Splunk."
"It takes a little bit of time for Log360 to actually learn your environment."
"The integration with SharePoint and Teams should be improved."
"The solution lacks some features when compared to other products."
"On the logging system, there's a local on-client side that is encrypted, and there's one that is not encrypted. It is only for diagnostical purposes. However, both being encrypted would be very valuable for some audits."
"The support needs improvement."
"Most times log sheets are not assigned well."
"We can log in as a local user, and it's fine, but when we login with an Active Directory user, we cannot."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while ManageEngine Log360 is ranked 27th in Log Management with 15 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while ManageEngine Log360 is rated 7.2. 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 ManageEngine Log360 writes "Facilitates incident backtracking and identifying the cause of incidents but insufficient intelligence-driven analysis to suppress unnecessary alerts". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security, whereas ManageEngine Log360 is most compared with ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer, Wazuh, Splunk Enterprise Security, Fortinet FortiSIEM and Fortinet FortiAnalyzer. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. ManageEngine Log360 report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors, best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors, and best User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) 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.