We performed a comparison between Grafana Loki and IBM Security QRadar 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."Loki also utilizes the same service discovery mechanism as used by Prometheus. So, whatever labeled metadata you see in Prometheus, you have the exact same metadata in the Loki system. Given this level of intricacy and the attempt to address these challenges, I firmly believe that Loki deserves praise for the work."
"The best feature of Grafana Loki is that it integrates well with our other tool."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is an open-source tool that is stable and flexible."
"The effectiveness of filters is pivotal for optimizing the search process and extracting the specific information we need from the extensive log data."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to set up alerts, which becomes necessary when we need to receive notifications for specific events."
"The tool can be used in multi-cluster environments."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the tool's GUI. The solution's GUI is very user-friendly."
"We are using Grafana Loki as a database for real-time metrics."
"It is very stable. We have not faced interruptions in the past four and a half years."
"Most of our clients are interested in automation. The automation part is good because they are able to detect threats and vulnerabilities in real time. It's very fast."
"The QNI feature is the one I am very interested in, and I have also been interested in Watson. From the log analysis and the security perspective, we are able to dive deep into any of the logs and anomalies."
"What I like the most about it is that you can very easily install and configure it. As compared to other SIEM solutions, for which you need to know and do a lot more to prepare your SIEM environment, QRadar is much simpler to install and configure. There are various options in the Admin console. In the Admin tab, you can design dashboards and view various graphs. It has a lot of attractive features, and you don't need to configure everything on your own."
"It's hard for me to pinpoint any one feature that's most valuable because it is all about consuming logs and analyzing them. We started using QRadar UBA because we needed something that could analyze Linux authentication information. Other products take care of the Windows platform."
"IBM Qradar's ability to simplify the number of events, not only on a technical level but by making that information easy to pan through the orchestration deduplication. It is very impressive given that we have hundreds of devices that send event logs through."
"An engineer can live-monitor all the flow happening in real-time. This would help us a lot while investigating a case, and it would even help us with preventive actions."
"It helps us discover any threats with their alerts and tracking."
"The solution's scalability depends on the team managing the Grafana instance."
"We encountered certain limitations when it came to alerting, particularly when dealing with specific data sources."
"The product must improve its UI."
"We had a well-structured dashboard with a functional query. However, an issue arose when the Kubernetes pod restarted. The statistics from our Grafana query would reset, dropping to zero and starting anew. This was particularly noticeable with linear graphs, which are expected to show consistent growth."
"In Grafana Loki, the creation of metrics is not so easy, making it an area that could be made easier."
"Enhancing speed could be a game-changer, and while it might vary depending on the application, it's a factor worth exploring."
"The Docker container partition feature needs improvement as they do not reuse the space and goes into a pending state."
"The solution has shortcomings regarding security monitoring-oriented features that need improvement."
"I think QRadar is very complex. It's a distributed system and IBM QRadar has an all-in-one solution which is not like that distributed solution but it's a good product. IBM needs to consider the user interface because if we compare it with AlienVault, the AlienVault user interface is fantastic but the IBM QRadar user interface is very complex. They should focus on how to make it easier for the client."
"I think that the search speed of this solution could be improved."
"This solution is on-premise and many customers are moving to the cloud base solution."
"Technical support really needs to be improved. Right now, they aren't where they need to be at all."
"Some of the cloud apps need improvement."
"There is one problem with QRadar in regards to the add-on apps. The apps can be frustrating. For example, when I add a big app like one of the add-ons for resiliency, add-on applications for QRadar, these applications require different hardware to implement and to deploy. The resiliency connector because there's a considerable amount of data scanning, operates for these apps correctly."
"They should provide more manual examples online so that I can learn it myself."
"Ideally we would like a mobile version so that any alert that comes in will notify us in a mobile app, or by using SMS integration."
Grafana Loki is ranked 13th in Log Management with 12 reviews while IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews. Grafana Loki is rated 8.0, while IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Grafana Loki writes "Effective for Logging, recovery from node failures is fast and single UI supports metrics, logs, and even tracing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". Grafana Loki is most compared with Graylog, Wazuh, syslog-ng, Splunk Enterprise Security and Fortinet FortiAnalyzer, whereas IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM and Elastic Security. See our Grafana Loki vs. IBM Security QRadar report.
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.