We performed a comparison between Galvanize IncidentBond and IBM Resilient based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, ServiceNow, IBM and others in Security Incident Response."The customization and the transparency of data while still maintaining a mostly user-friendly UI, are key features. It allows for me, as an engineer, to evolve the individual components and modules, and to create a much more meaningful picture than the individual pieces in isolation ever could."
"The most valuable features of IBM Resilient are its flexibility and customization options for incident response."
"The most valuable thing about it is how easy it is to navigate the user interface."
"The product is very good at incident response."
"The initial setup of IBM Resilient is not that complex since my company already has a support license that we use internally. In general, the product's deployment phase is not that complex."
"The UBA, User Behavior Analytics, is very good."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"As a whole, the product is stable...Technical support is very good."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Stable – Release – Experimental" system with their releases, and all the proper checks and balances, I’d be an incredibly happy individual. I can appreciate the cause and affect, wherein the customization of the tool drives rapid release schedules, and the paradox that creates with the idea of stable releases. I’d also like more transparency about known bugs and issues."
"The product needs a bit more development."
"The implementation could be a bit simpler."
"What could make IBM Resilient better is if IBM increased the number of built-in integrations with different products from other vendors or third-party products."
"IBM Resilient is quite complex, including its configuration."
"The response time of the support is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"There are shortcomings with IBM Resilient's technical support team that can be considered for improvement in the future."
"Integrating IBM Resilient with other applications can be very difficult and technically challenging. Often, they use the excuse that you are using the latest version of an application, such as an endpoint security system, and they don't have an API or support for it at the moment. There is no automation in the SOAR solution."
"One thing to improve is how it handles data formats, which currently might require scripting for conversion to CSV before uploading."
Earn 20 points
Galvanize IncidentBond is ranked 13th in Security Incident Response while IBM Resilient is ranked 4th in Security Incident Response with 17 reviews. Galvanize IncidentBond is rated 9.0, while IBM Resilient is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Galvanize IncidentBond writes "Customization and transparency of data, while maintaining a mostly user-friendly UI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Resilient writes "Simple deployment, scalable, but lacking third-party solution compatibility ". Galvanize IncidentBond is most compared with , whereas IBM Resilient is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, Splunk SOAR, ServiceNow Security Operations, IBM Security QRadar and Fortinet FortiSOAR.
See our list of best Security Incident Response vendors.
We monitor all Security Incident Response 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.