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

Lumu vs Vectra AI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 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

Lumu
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
10th
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
8th
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
17th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Vectra AI
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
3rd
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
2nd
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
15th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (10th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Lumu is 3.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Vectra AI is 11.3%, up from 10.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Juan Solano - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects against threats and handles it in time with moderate pricing
Mostly, Lumu is an automatic tool. We'll deploy on firewalls and DNS servers. Lumu detects every attack on our network. The other day, we had CLC, the command controller, and the tool reacted automatically. It detected the attack and immediately blocked it without intervention from my team. The improvement is in the security process, as it's now entirely automated. We no longer require a technician or engineer to monitor our network 24/7. Lumu updates with AI and global threat intelligence, which greatly assists us. Since our workload is lighter, Lumu handles all of our tasks. We're using FortiGate for the firewall and Kaspersky for endpoints. If you are going to Lumu, you need another solution for the endpoint. You need to integrate with other tools like firewalls or another antivirus. I recommend the solution based on the price, usability, and service offered by the solution. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
Mohammad Alkurdi - PeerSpot reviewer
Innovative detection features enhance monitoring
The advantages of the integration are not entirely out-of-the-box. You have to do it manually. When I'm doing tier response, an out-of-the-box solution is not available. You need to have a Linux server, and from the Linux server, you must perform AI tasks, and there is a lot to be handled in the back end. This is a major consideration about them. The recall feature, if it can be placed in some areas instead of the cloud, and charged for, would be better. Recall the storage where you watch all the traffic, and you can recall it and try to analyze it in the back end. It’s cloud-based. If they offer it on-prem, it would be better. I think they have a solution, but I have never tested it, to be honest with you.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Most of it is automated, so I do not have to watch it to get alerts."
"I like Lumu's simple user interface. When we deployed it, we got full access, allowing us to identify IP addresses on the network and connect machine names to users. It helped us identify and block threats via the firewall. I also appreciate the chat support and ticket closure process. We're currently reviewing network detection solutions, and my recommendations include Lumu, Sentinel, and a few others. Regarding functionality and user-friendliness, I would recommend Lumu over the others."
"The tool's support team helps partners resolve any problems with the product."
"You can access external links, playbooks, MITRE Matrix, and a lot of information."
"Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time."
"The context provided by the tool is very complete, it includes the miter matrix, playbooks, links, hashes, and much more."
"It's been helpful for overall extended network visibility."
"The packet-capturing feature is very useful."
"Vectra produces actionable data using automation. That has helped us. It's less manpower now to look at incidents, which has definitely increased efficiency. Right now, in a lot of cases, our mean time to detection is within zero days. This tells me by the time something happened, and we were able to detect it, it was within the same day."
"One of the things that we didn't expect to happen was that our network team also jumped on it faster than we thought. In most cases, if it's a security tool that's working on the network part, they can also use it to find out certain flaws that have been in the system. Certain flaws, related to some legacy stuff, were already there for quite a few years, which they couldn't explain at first, but we could explain them based on the timing of certain things."
"One of the key advantages for us is we define a 24/7 service around it. We use far more of Vectra alerts than we do with our SIEM product because we understand that when we get an alert from Vectra we actually need to do something about it."
"The initial setup was pretty straightforward."
"There are many detection features available."
"The most useful feature is the anomaly detection because it's not signature-based. It picks up the initial part of any attack, like the recon and those aspects of the kill chain, very well."
"Vectra AI helped our team be more productive and save time. We have less work thanks to it."
 

Cons

"It would be good if we could access the physical logs."
"Nothing so far needs to be improved."
"The free version is minimal compared to the full version."
"Lumu's ability to discover threats is an area of concern where improvements are needed."
"The reports need improvement."
"I am happy with the current features. However, one important one is to improve the reports."
"The integration with different vendors and endpoints could be improved."
"The main improvement I can see would be to integrate with more external solutions."
"Integration with other security components needs improvement. It should have true integration as opposed to just being a separate pane of glass."
"One area where there's room for improvement is the absence of a comprehensive TCP recording and replay feature."
"We have a lot of system solutions and integrations with system solutions. Vectra is a type of black box. It implements AI-informed detection mechanisms, but we cannot create system detections. I understand that the product is designed this way, but it would be great if we could create our own detections as well."
"I would like to see data processed onshore. Right now, the cloud components, like Office 365, must be processed on servers outside of Australia. I would like to see a future adoption of onshore processing."
"The false positives and the tuning side of it is something that could use improvement. But that could be from our side."
"The solution has not reduced the security analyst workload in our organization because we still need to SIEM. Unfortunately, while Vectra, for us, is a brilliant tool for network investigations, giving wonderful visibility, it doesn't go the whole way to replace our SIEM that is needed for compliance. So, I still have the same amount of alerting and logging that I did before. It gives us more defined ability to see incidents, but it doesn't give us enough information to satisfy a PCI or 27001 audit."
"The rules for threats are not always precise and Vectra AI should improve this."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is available at a good price. The tool offers a good and competitive price for customers."
"It is the cheapest solution we found."
"Compared to Lumu, other solutions are more expensive. SentinelOne was a bit cheaper, and another provider's price structure is unclear, but Lumu fit our budget nicely. SentinelOne's cost depends on the number of devices, and it might be similar to Lumu's, depending on deployment."
"Cost is a big factor, as always. However, I think we have a very good price–performance ratio."
"It is an expensive solution, but it's not the most expensive we've seen. We also know how much we're going to pay, unlike with some other providers where all of a sudden our license explodes."
"At the time of purchase, we found the pricing acceptable. We had an urgency to get something in place because we had a minor breach that occurred at the tail end of 2016 to the beginning of 2017. This indicated we had a lack of ability to detect things on the network. Hence, why we moved quickly to get into the tool in place. We found things like Bitcoin mining and botnets which we closed quickly. In that regard, it was worth the money."
"From a pricing perspective, they are very commercially competitive. From a licensing perspective, just be conscious that some of their future cloud solutions come with additional subscriptions. Also, if you're outside of the US, you will get charged freight for the device back to your country."
"Vectra is a bit on the higher side in terms of price, but they have always been transparent. The reason that they are this good is that they invest, so they need to charge accordingly."
"Their licensing model is antiquated. I'm not a fan of their licensing model. We have to pay for licensing based on four different things. You have to pay based on the number of unique IPs, the number of logs that we send through Recall and Stream, and the size of our environment. They need to simplify their licensing down to just one thing. It should be based on the amount of data, the number of devices, or something else, but there should be just one thing for everything. That's what they need to base their licensing on. Cost-wise, they're not cheap. They were definitely the most expensive option, but you get what you pay for. They're not the cheapest option."
"Vectra AI is not a cheap solution."
"The solution is low-cost and affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Lumu?
Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time.
What needs improvement with Lumu?
Lumu's ability to discover threats is an area of concern where improvements are needed.
What is your primary use case for Lumu?
My company is currently dealing with Lumu's onboarding process. Lumu is used to monitor the environment permanently and validate if there is ransomware that can exploit our infrastructure.
What is the biggest difference between Corelight and Vectra AI?
The two platforms take a fundamentally different approach to NDR. Corelight is limited to use cases that require the eventual forwarding of events and parsed data logs to a security team’s SIEM or ...
What do you like most about Vectra AI?
The solution is currently used as a central threat detection and response system.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Vectra AI?
It is very acceptable when you compare it with Darktrace, for example.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Vectra Networks, Vectra AI NDR
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Tribune Media Group, Barry University, Aruba Networks, Good Technology, Riverbed, Santa Clara University, Securities Exchange, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association
Find out what your peers are saying about Lumu vs. Vectra AI and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.