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

IBM Cloud Pak for Security vs IBM Security QRadar comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Cloud Pak for Security
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (22nd)
IBM Security QRadar
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
204
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (6th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (4th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (18th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (10th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

IBM Cloud Pak for Security and IBM Security QRadar aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. IBM Cloud Pak for Security is designed for Cloud and Data Center Security and holds a mindshare of 0.1%, up 0.1% compared to last year.
IBM Security QRadar, on the other hand, focuses on Security Information and Event Management (SIEM), holds 10.2% mindshare, up 10.1% since last year.
Cloud and Data Center Security
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1907040 - PeerSpot reviewer
Great user-friendly interface; provides many functionalities and many free applications
The interface is good and very user-friendly, it's easy for our customers to use. Cloud Pak provides a lot of functionalities and many free applications available from the online shop which can be deployed to your system. It allows for an increase in functionalities even if you've bought the smallest installation.
Muzzamil Hussain - PeerSpot reviewer
Is easy to integrate and doesn't require maintenance
One major drawback we are facing is in the area of IBM Security QRadar integration with flat file databases. IBM Security QRadar does not support flat file database integration. We are currently facing an issue with respect to the database, which you normally call a NoSQL database. There is no direct integration mechanism available with IBM Security QRadar. We have to approach IBM and generate a ticket so that they can develop a custom method for the integration. In database integration, we are facing issues with IBM Security QRadar. The solution does not support the integration of flat file databases. Certain organizations have flat file databases. IBM does not support direct integration with some databases. We had to create a plug, and we requested IBM to develop a parser, but it is taking IBM a couple of months to develop it. I think a flat-file database should be supported directly instead of developing a parser plugin. There should be a more refined threat intelligence platform, and cross-integration should be possible with locally available threat intelligence platforms.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The interface is good and very user-friendly."
"It has a lot of good correlation rules. From a customer's point of view, it is one of the best solutions because you don't need to create correlation rules from scratch. You just review them and customize them as you want."
"Improved our organization's TCO."
"I have found its network traffic log, network bit log, and QBI most valuable."
"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 saves a lot of time. We integrate the customer's firewall with all their networking devices."
"The solution is flexible and easy to use."
"It has a good integration with the artificial intelligence engine of Watson."
"We've found the solution to be scalable."
 

Cons

"Lacks sufficient technical support."
"IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics could improve machine learning use cases because they are limited and most of the use cases are rule-based. They should develop more use cases, such as in Securonix or Exabeam because they will detect a threat. Using machine learning is mainly on the correlation rules, but if you think about Exabeam or Securonix, they detect using machine learning or machine learning-based algorithms."
"IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is good, but I think the functionality should be much more integrated. You should have easy access to the artifacts if you are doing a particular investigation. It's good, but other team solutions like LogRhythm are actually merging the functionality. So, I think that is something IBM can work on."
"There is a lot of manual configuration required in order for the product to run smoothly, and I think that it could be made more automatic."
"The architecture could be improved. I got stuck for a long time trying to understand the architecture, as it is quite challenging."
"I think that the search speed of this solution could be improved."
"I have noticed the interface has room for improvement."
"They should speed up the incident response and also, at the same time, reduce the amount of manual effort that is required."
"It is not app based."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Customers have to purchase a license based on the number of users, devices, and applications they want to protect. It allows you to take a license on a subscription basis for three years or five years."
"This price is a little high, so it's an expensive product."
"IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is an application framework and you can install many applications without any additional costs."
"think the pricing is quite flexible."
"IBM has subscriptions plans that run for one year."
"I feel that the price is reasonable but compared to other products that are on the market, such as an offering by Microsoft, it is more expensive."
"Pricing (based on EPS) will be more accurate."
"It could be cheaper, but the value itself is far more important for us than the price. Typically, our clients have yearly subscriptions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud and Data Center Security solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Jun 28, 2015
Qradar vs. ArcSight
Continuing with the SIEM posts we have done at Infosecnirvana, this post is a Head to head comparison of the two Industry leading SIEM products in the market – HP ArcSight and IBM QRadar Both the products have consistently been in the Gartner Leaders Quadrant. Both HP and IBM took over niche SIEM…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Retailer
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
10%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
8%
Educational Organization
23%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 SOC product do you recommend?
For tools I’d recommend: -SIEM- LogRhythm -SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is asking to miss details that are critical, and ending up a statistic. Also, rememb...
What do you like most about IBM QRadar?
The event collector, flow collector, PCAP and SOAR are valuable.
 

Also Known As

No data available
IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, QRadar, IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai, VMware, Illumio and others in Cloud and Data Center Security. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.