We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Wazuh based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: IBM Security QRadar users say the solution provides extensive information and helpful leads for locating pertinent data. Wazuh stands out for its effortless integration, excellent log monitoring capabilities, and ELK-based investigation. IBM Security QRadar could improve its rule deployment and lower its false positive rate. Users would also like expanded storage capacity, streamlined user management, and a more mature architecture. Wazuh needs improvements in event source coverage, threat intelligence integration, and real-time monitoring of Unix systems.
Service and Support: Some customers of IBM Security QRadar have had trouble connecting with knowledgeable support staff and experienced delayed responses. Wazuh's customer service is generally deemed satisfactory, and many customers noted that they could easily find answers from community forums.
Ease of Deployment: IBM Security QRadar's initial setup can be complex for users without expertise, and the difficulty may vary depending on the size of the data set. Some users said that Wazuh’s setup is easy and fast, while others perceived it as complicated and said it required a significant amount of time.
Pricing: IBM Security QRadar can be costly because users need to buy new hardware to upgrade. Wazuh is a cost-effective option as it is open-source and completely free to acquire.
ROI: IBM Security QRadar delivers a high return on investment, improving security through its advanced user behavior analytics. Wazuh's MSP program and partnerships offer opportunities to generate revenue from the platform.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer IBM Security QRadar over Wazuh. The advanced security features and overall strength of QRadar make it the favored option. Users like QRadar's extensive and actionable insights, user-friendly interface, and adaptability. QRadar offers a comprehensive overview of network activity and risk management.
"The common and advanced security policies for threat hunting and blocking attacks are valuable."
"It has been great for us. Previously, we didn't have a solution to protect us, especially from malware, whereas now, we are getting protection up front, especially from the malware attacks coming through emails or endpoints."
"The integration with other Microsoft solutions is the most valuable feature."
"The visibility into threats is also very impressive because Microsoft helps you predict things and provides analytics to help you really improve your security. And all of this technology works across the domain, so it is pretty helpful in terms of threat analytics."
"We are connected to Microsoft and have every laptop enrolled. This acts as an endpoint. The tool helps me check security and compliance. I can also check what a device is doing."
"I like 365 Defender's advanced threat hunting. The dashboard is user-friendly with templates for site policies, etc. The most important use case is evaluating the risk links and applications."
"The most valuable feature of all is the full integration with the rest of the software in the operating system and Office 365, as well as Microsoft SCCM. It is quite easy for us to work with the whole instance of Microsoft products. This integration improves the benefits of the whole suite of products."
"We also use Microsoft Sentinel, Defender for Cloud, Defender for Identity, and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps. They are all integrated and it was very easy to integrate them. In my experience with the integrations, it was just a click of a button and things were integrated. It's just a button."
"The ability to add extensions is the most valuable feature. For example, extensions that provide valuable test ports."
"In addition to using this solution for our security operations center, we are using it for our other customers."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is how it monitors the real network. That is its leading security feature."
"The visibility it gives you into your infrastructure has been great."
"It has a powerful GUI where you can put together your use cases, and don't have to write your own scripts."
"The solution is flexible and easy to use."
"QRadar, Splunk, and ArcSight are SIEM solutions with built-in AI/ML features. They can do the complete investigation and alert the admin about what is happening. They can also do the root cause analysis. There are many other features that come with QRadar. It has a more granular log, so you can integrate with various non-IT as well as IT-based components. You can get unstructured data to the SIEM data, and you can identify more what is happening in the network or what is happening in the central head office. You can also identify what is happening between your remote offices. You can also use it to identify what the users in the field are doing on their devices and how things are moving. From the integration point of view, it is very centric. It gives complete control centrally. If a user is not connected to the system, whenever he comes online, we can see the policy updates over the Internet, and we can ensure that the data that is supposed to be protected is protected."
"I have found IBM QRadar to be stable."
"If they support a solution, it is easy to do an integration."
"Its cost-effectiveness is the most valuable aspect."
"Wazuh has very flexible and robust features."
"Wazuh is free and easy to use. It is also adjustable, and we can use it on the cloud and on-premises."
"It's very easy to integrate Wazuh with other environments, cloud applications, and on-prem applications. So, the advantage is that it's easy to implement and integrate with other solutions."
"Wazuh's best features are syscheck, its ability to immediately resolve vulnerabilities, and that it's open source."
"It has efficient SCA capabilities."
"The tool is stable."
"Improving scalability, especially for very large tenants, could be beneficial for Microsoft Defender XDR."
"Microsoft tends to provide too many features, which makes the solution prone to bugs."
"In the beginning, it's difficult to navigate the system because it is quite large. Just trying to find your way and understand how the system works can be hard. After spending quite a lot of time searching it's a lot easier, but I wish it were a bit more user-friendly when you're trying to find things."
"The tool gives inconsistent answers and crashes a lot."
"Automated playbooks and automated dashboards would be preferable to the way the data is currently being presented."
"The solution could improve by having better machine learning and AI. Additionally, the interface, documentation, and integration could be better."
"The console is missing some features that would be helpful for a managed services provider, like device and user management."
"Sometimes, configurations take much longer than expected."
"We sometimes get an error about the hard drive. Approximately once in two months, we can't find the logs, and they go missing, which is a terrible issue. We are getting support for this issue from our support company."
"I have noticed a few things while working on this. After the restart of the server, sometimes, the services misbehave, and you need to manually start or restart the service. I have seen that specifically with the Tomcat service. Sometimes, when you click on log sources, instead of opening the log source extension, it redirects you over the internet."
"GUI needs to be improved."
"There is one problem with QRadar in regards to the add-on apps. The apps can be frustrating. For example, when I add a big app like one of the add-ons for resiliency, add-on applications for QRadar, these applications require different hardware to implement and to deploy. The resiliency connector because there's a considerable amount of data scanning, operates for these apps correctly."
"Dashboards and reports could provide better visualization of SIEM activity."
"QRadar needs to be improved on the storage side, particularly when the disc exceeded the maximum threshold."
"We need more features in order to create rules to detect or to meet some requirements for other areas, for example, catching the event from other authentication tools."
"The dashboard and reports are not user-friendly or efficient so are of little help with threat hunting activity."
"Its configuration process is time-consuming."
"The computing resources are consuming and do not make sense."
"One area where Wazuh could use some improvement is in its reporting mechanism, especially for high-level management like CSOs and CEOs."
"They need to go towards integrating with more cloud applications and not just OS like Windows and Linux."
"Some features, like alerting, are complex with Wazuh."
"The only challenge we faced with Wazuh was the lack of direct support."
"Since it's an open-source tool, scalability is the main issue."
"While it is scalable, it can suffer from reduced latencies."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 6th in Log Management with 198 reviews while Wazuh is ranked 2nd in Log Management with 38 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Wazuh is rated 7.4. 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 Wazuh writes "It integrates seamlessly with AWS cloud-native services". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Sentinel, whereas Wazuh is most compared with Elastic Security, Security Onion, Splunk Enterprise Security, AlienVault OSSIM and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Wazuh report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors, best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Log Management 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.
