Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Exabeam vs NetWitness Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Exabeam
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Security Incident Response (4th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (9th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (11th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (9th)
NetWitness Platform
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
33rd
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (34th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of Exabeam is 1.7%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetWitness Platform is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Exabeam1.7%
NetWitness Platform0.9%
Other97.4%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

DH
Solution Architect at CTC
Improved threat detection has provided clear user risk insights and streamlined incident response
Exabeam's UEBA is the most valuable feature that I have found so far. Exabeam's UEBA displays the type of description that it could show in a console regarding one particular user, the rating that it shows, and how vulnerable the user is, which is very good. Exabeam's automation for incident response is very good. The machine learning capabilities of Exabeam are also good.
MOTASHIM Al Razi - PeerSpot reviewer
CISO at One Bank Limited
It is a stable solution, but they should make the user interface easier to understand
The solution's initial setup takes work. We have to organize multiple paths and many features. The deployment process takes less than a week. But it takes a month to complete if we want to make the solution smarter by integrating it with various devices. I rate the process as a six out of ten.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Exabeam includes machine learning features and out-of-the-box rules that we rely on."
"The advanced analytics has a really great overview of user behavior."
"Timeline based analysis; good platform support"
"Exabeam is very easy to use, with a straightforward platform and workflow, unlike other tools that require more expertise."
"Exabeam Fusion SIEM has a good performance and more advantages than traditional solutions."
"The way it can connect with AWS is very useful, and the integrations are pretty good."
"The platform is not extremely expensive compared to its direct competitors; I would rate its pricing around six out of ten."
"It's a very user-friendly product and it's a very comprehensive technology."
"The newer 11.5 version that my team is using has found it to have good mapping."
"The most valuable features are the packet decoder, log decoder, and concentrator."
"The most valuable features are the integration and ease of use."
"The product's initial setup phase was not at all difficult."
"The most valuable features are its ingestion of logs and raising of alerts based on those logs."
"The most valuable feature is that we can create our own connectors for any application, and NetWitness provides the training and tools to do it."
"The most valuable feature is the hunting ability to work in a CERT."
"The solution is really scalable for the high-end power, enterprise customer."
 

Cons

"We had a large volume right from the beginning and they weren't quite prepared for that. That's something that they should think about when it comes to customers that have a large volume to start off with."
"Updating the new release of Exabeam Fusion SIEM takes time and slows our performance."
"We use the on-prem Exabeam product and face limitations using the web UI and administration of custom models and rules."
"Exabeam needs to improve its adaptive nature towards rules and its capability to understand the entire client environment faster."
"One area for the solution's improvement is integration capabilities, particularly out-of-the-box integration which sometimes requires additional professional services."
"They should provide detailed information about detecting phishing emails."
"One area that needs improvement is interacting with Exabeam's API. There was a headache regarding the API; the documentation wasn't clear, and the syntax wasn't very precise."
"Exabeam needs to improve its documentation and provide more customization for dashboards and case management."
"Lots of competing products have vulnerability protection built into their products, and this solution would be improved by including that support."
"The initial setup is complex. There are other solutions that are easier to implement."
"The product's licensing models are complex to understand. This particular area needs improvement."
"We have encountered issues with unresolved crashes."
"The initial setup is very complex and should be simplified."
"Security needs improvement."
"I'd like to see improvement in its ease of use. It's basically unusable. It's overly complex."
"Sometimes, it gives me static when integrating Windows-based systems. It should produce a precise log of sorts as to where the problem is. For example, a few days ago because of the McAfee application firewall, I couldn't get access to the particular Windows machine. So, my team and I had to figure out by ourselves that there was a virus responsible for the obstacle. This solution should trigger a meaningful log or message indicating the reason the user or implementer can't get into the machine."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The platform is not extremely expensive compared to its direct competitors; I would rate its pricing around six out of ten."
"Exabeam is not a cheap solution."
"Exabeam Fusion SIEM's pricing is reasonable."
"There is an annual license required to use Exabeam Fusion SIEM. The price of the solution should be reduced."
"They have a great model for pricing that can be based either on user count or gigabits per day."
"The solution is expensive."
"We have yearly licensing costs. The license fee can be based on the volume of EPS. Some organizations may have, as a gentlemanly gesture, 10,000 EPS and get a 3,000 EPS license but actually use 5,000 EPS."
"The licenses are good but the cost is very expensive."
"The new pricing and licensing mechanisms are fair. I would advise always to get the full solution (i.e., not only Logs)."
"The product is expensive."
"There is a licensing fee and the customer can choose whether he wishes this to be subscription-based or perpetual."
"RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets do not have a subscription model, it's a one-time purchase. There is only a perpetual license."
"It is cheap."
"In comparison to other SIEM solutions such as Splunk, NetWitness is less costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
883,896 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Feb 26, 2015
HP ArcSight vs. IBM QRadar vs. ​McAfee Nitro vs. Splunk vs. RSA Security vs. LogRhythm
We at Infosecnirvana.com have done several posts on SIEM. After the Dummies Guide on SIEM, we are following it up with a SIEM Product Comparison – 101 deck. So, here it is for your viewing pleasure. Let me know what you think by posting your comments below. The key products compared here are…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Performing Arts
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

What are the biggest differences between Securonix UEBA, Exabeam, and IBM QRadar?
It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendlier GUI and are not licensed based on capacity (amount of logs and information in...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Exabeam Fusion SIEM?
I do not have much information about the pricing. However, I am aware that Exabeam is cheaper than Palo Alto based on discussions in meetings.
What needs improvement with Exabeam Fusion SIEM?
Exabeam's integration capabilities are not good, as Exabeam has a very limited number of integrations and no out-of-box integration, which is an area where Exabeam should improve. I have noticed th...
What do you like most about NetWitness Platform?
The product's initial setup phase was not at all difficult.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetWitness Platform?
The pricing is comparable to others, and I consider the cost to be intermediate. Specific cost details are unknown to me.
What needs improvement with NetWitness Platform?
There is currently no need for improvement in the SIEM ( /categories/security-information-and-event-management-siem ), though there could be potential enhancements by integrating with AI.
 

Also Known As

No data available
RSA Security Analytics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hulu, ADP, Safeway, BBCN Bank
Los Angeles World Airports, Reply
Find out what your peers are saying about Exabeam vs. NetWitness Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
883,896 professionals have used our research since 2012.