No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Graylog Security vs Trellix ESM 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

Graylog Security
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
46th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix ESM
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
28th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of Graylog Security is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix ESM is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Trellix ESM1.2%
Graylog Security0.6%
Other98.2%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

Tony Zafiropoulos - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner/ Chief Engineer at Fixvirus.com
Aggregates logs in one place and helps to review data points
We tried Graylog Security, starting with their inexpensive open-source version. We tested it out and continued using it for a while. As for the main differences between Graylog Security and other vendors, some users might prefer cloud-based platforms over on-premises solutions. It isn't inherently cloud-native, but that might not matter much for some.
MD
Senior Vice President IT at AS IT Consulting Pvt. Ltd.
Offers comprehensive report generation while maintaining ease of integration
We need to improve Trellix ESM by making sure that most of the logging devices available in the global market should be covered, and if there is any device which is not covered, there should not be any additional charges for writing the custom parsers on that. We can add some new features regarding AI in the future for Trellix ESM, but the maturity will take a longer time. There are many false positives that happen in an environment during the first couple of months, or around six months, so the system analyst is not able to identify whether the event which has occurred is a true positive or a false positive.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool aggregates logs. We can see the logs in one place."
"We use the solution to collect logs."
"The most valuable feature for us is that it comes with many correlations, reports, and dashboards already available. It's also very easy to use."
"The ease of use is the most valuable feature. Over the years I have always been using this solution and have become comfortable with it."
"It is user-friendly. The notification part of McAfee ESM is very easy."
"The product’s most valuable feature is log monitoring."
"The tool's effectiveness depends on how you define your log sources. To build visibility of incoming and outgoing traffic, you need logs from perimeter defense, firewalls, web application firewalls, and endpoint protection. With good traffic visibility, incident response time is really quick."
"It enables us to detect malicious threats, issues, or vulnerabilities in our network."
"If a customer is specifically looking for log and event analysis, with the correlations, then this solution is a good choice."
"The solution is 100% stable. We really have had a great time working with it. It hasn't let us down."
 

Cons

"Graylog Security needs to incorporate security scorecards."
"Product currently requires Flash."
"The product’s alert response feature needs improvement. It could be more flexible and secure."
"The API the product provides still needs to develop some maturity."
"There are always multiple bugs in the product. For example, the console page was hanging multiple times. Afterwards, they released multiple upgrades for the same, multiple patches from McAfee."
"We acquired the IBM product because McAfee is slightly confusing to use, and it's broader."
"McAfee has many issues with integration. I am looking for an end-to-end integration such as EDR, and Next-Generation SOC 2.0."
"There's no software support from McAfee."
"We are having trouble migrating our data sources from version 10 to version 11.2. We cannot add new data sources to the most recent version."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"The licensing cost is based on EPS."
"The cost is dependent on the customer's environment and requirements."
"McAfee is the right choice for a low-budget solution."
"You should buy the distributed option instead of the all-in-one for environments with more than 1000 end points."
"We renew our license annually."
"We pay for our licensing fees on a yearly basis, and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The product is slightly expensive."
"The cost is all included. The finance department handles the financial part, and we mostly don't get involved in it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
886,976 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
Educational Organization
15%
Retailer
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Graylog Security?
The tool aggregates logs. We can see the logs in one place.
What is your primary use case for Graylog Security?
I feed different data points to the tool and review them.
What advice do you have for others considering Graylog Security?
I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. It's a good option for getting started.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee ESM?
When discussing Trellix ESM pricing and licensing, if you consider some premium product, the pricing also has to be premium, however, enterprise customers who look for a premium product, alongside ...
What needs improvement with McAfee ESM?
Areas of Trellix ESM that could be improved or enhanced include checking on the clients who are still on-prem, especially banks, as most are not moving everything to the cloud due to confidentialit...
What is your primary use case for McAfee ESM?
My customer's usual use case for Trellix ESM involves one client, as most of the users have moved to ESM. Nowadays, they don't use IPS only, since McAfee IPS is standalone; they incorporate firewal...
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee ESM, NitroSecurity, McAfee Enterprise Security Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
San Francisco Police Credit Union, Wªstenrot Gruppe, Volusion, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, Government of New Brunswick, State of Colorado, Macquarie Telecom, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Cologne Bonn Airport
Find out what your peers are saying about Graylog Security vs. Trellix ESM and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
886,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.