We compared IBM Security QRadar and Microsoft Sentinel based on our users' reviews across several parameters.
IBM Security QRadar is praised for its advanced threat detection, customizable dashboards, and integration capabilities, while users mention concerns about its complex interface and lack of flexibility. Microsoft Sentinel is highlighted for its affordability, intuitive interface, and automation options, with users mentioning the need for improved customization and integration features. Users find value in both products, with IBM Security QRadar focusing on comprehensive features and advanced threat detection, while Microsoft Sentinel offers affordability and streamlined incident response capabilities.
Features: IBM Security QRadar excels in customizable dashboards and seamless integration with security tools, offering real-time threat detection. Microsoft Sentinel stands out for its advanced threat visibility and streamlined incident response with machine learning capabilities.
Pricing and ROI: IBM Security QRadar has a higher setup cost, with some users mentioning the need for experienced personnel. Licensing is seen as complex but offers flexibility. Microsoft Sentinel has affordable, minimal setup costs and flexible, easy-to-understand licensing options. With comprehensive features and an intuitive interface, IBM Security QRadar offers great value in detecting and managing threats. Users highlighted its ability to streamline operations and improve security posture. Microsoft Sentinel users also praised its positive impact on organizations, noting benefits like improved security, reduced incident response time, and enhanced threat visibility. Despite some initial setup complexities, they appreciate its ease of use and integration with other Microsoft products.
Room for Improvement: IBM Security QRadar could improve user interface intuitiveness, performance speed, customization flexibility, and support resources. Microsoft Sentinel users seek better platform usability, customization options, integration with other tools, enhanced reporting, and improved documentation.
Deployment and customer support: Users found IBM Security QRadar quicker to deploy and set up compared to Microsoft Sentinel, which, although quicker to deploy, had a more complex setup process, according to some users. IBM Security QRadar's highly knowledgeable and responsive customer service provides prompt assistance. Microsoft Sentinel's customer service is praised for its effectiveness and quick issue resolution, creating positive user experiences.
The summary above is based on 144 interviews we conducted recently with IBM Security QRadar and Microsoft Sentinel users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"What we like about QRadar and the models that IBM has, is it can go from a small-to-medium enterprise to a larger organization, and it gives you the same value."
"The features that I have found most valuable in QRadar are its data enrichment, use case creations, and adding references - those kinds of features are very good. Also QRadar's event filtration and device integration are perfect."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is how it monitors the real network. That is its leading security feature."
"The timeline and machine learning features are great."
"The monitoring and dashboards are great."
"It is the core of our entire SOX."
"I like that it's easy to use and the performance is good."
"The ability to add extensions is the most valuable feature. For example, extensions that provide valuable test ports."
"The most valuable features are its threat handling and detection. It's a powerful tool because it's based on machine learning and on the behavior of malware."
"The most valuable feature is the performance because unlike legacy SIEMs that were on-premises, it does not require as much maintenance."
"Mainly, this is a cloud-native product. So, there are zero concerns about managing the whole infrastructure on-premises."
"The features that stand out are the detection engine and its integration with multiple data sources."
"It has a lot of great features."
"The Log analytics are useful."
"The solution offers a lot of data on events. It helps us create specific detection strategies."
"Sentinel is a Microsoft product, so they provide very robust use cases and analytic groups, which are very beneficial for the security team. I also like the ability to integrate data sources into the software for on-premise and cloud-based solutions."
"The user interface is a bit clunky, a bit hard to find what you need."
"The solution lacks some maturity."
"The Indian tech support is not helpful."
"There are reports that I would like to generate that are either not included, or I cannot find."
"There should be an extension where we can get the reports. This could be an extension to the dashboard with the Guardian or another product with limited technology, for example IPS. Now, we only have IBM. Basically, it needs more and more integration models."
"Technical support is good, but not great."
"The solution lacks vendor support."
"There is room for improvement in IBM QRadar in integrating features for SOC maturity and security levels directly into QRadar."
"They're giving us the queries so we can plug them right into Sentinel. They need to have a streamlined process for updating them in the tool and knowing when things are updated and knowing when there are new detections available from Microsoft."
"Some of the data connectors are outdated, at least the ones that utilize Linux machines for log forwarding. I believe that Microsoft is already working on improving this."
"Its documentation is not so simple. It is easy for somebody who is Microsoft certified or more closely attached to Microsoft solutions. It is not easy for those who are working on open-source platforms. There isn't a central point where everything is documented, and there is no specific training or certification."
"The playbook is a bit difficult and could be improved."
"Sentinel's alerts and notifications are not fully optimized for mobile devices. The overall reporting and the analytics processes for the end user should also be improved. Also, the compatibility and availability of data sources and reports are not always perfect."
"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."
"Sentinel's reporting is complex and can be more user-friendly."
"The only thing is sometimes you can have a false positive."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while Microsoft Sentinel is ranked 2nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 85 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Sentinel is rated 8.2. 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 Microsoft Sentinel writes "Gives a comprehensive and holistic view of the ecosystem and improves visibility and the ability to respond". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Sentinel, whereas Microsoft Sentinel is most compared with AWS Security Hub, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Elastic Security and Wazuh. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Microsoft Sentinel report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors and best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) 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.