What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Security QRadar?

IBM solutions are always expensive, as it offers some industry-leading solutions, which is why we have implemented them. Now, locally developed and open-source solutions like Wazuh are available. Certain organizations are deploying the solutions. We receive no cost-benefit from IBM. It is an expensive solution, and we have to incur these costs. The tool's price is high. Our company faces pricing-related challenges with locally available products and other offerings like Splunk and Wazuh. In addition, there is a need to pay the tool's standard licensing fee. We outsource our SOC operations, so such expenses are in addition to the deployment.

I think the pricing is quite flexible. As a reseller, we had chances to win bids with IBM Security QRadar against Splunk, ArcSight, and even McAfee with better pricing around six or seven years ago. We won the deals with better pricing. Pricing could be flexible. It could depend on the number of assets used by the enterprise or on the number of events per second, allowing customers to choose what fits him or her the best.

The solution's pricing is based on the EPS model.

The product is expensive. We have purchased the perpetual license, but we pay for the support.

The tool's on-premise version is expensive. However, it is cheaper than Splunk. The hybrid model offers shared instances for customers, which is not expensive. Customers with a limited budget can opt for it. You can get premium support with licenses. However, if you need customized integration, you need to buy it.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate the price a one, where one is an extremely expensive product, and ten is a cheap product. IBM Security QRadar is an expensive product. A customer gets discounts only when they ask for them from IBM. The challenge is that if someone submits a request or proposal and finds that the prices of the products our company deals with are too high, we may not even be shortlisted for negotiations. If my company gets shortlisted for the next round, then we get questioned over the high prices.

IBM Security QRadar is about 50% less expensive than Splunk. SIEM solutions charge by the amount of data, whether EPS or gigabytes. They directly incentivize you not to put things in it, which doesn't make sense since the goal is to put everything in it. They'd make it where you can't afford to do it. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate IBM Security QRadar's pricing a five out of ten.

IBM Security QRadar is a very expensive tool.

In India, the solution is expensive. Only enterprise businesses can afford the tool. We need more than 3000 people in the organization to use it. We might have to pay for technical support separately.

I give the price of the solution a four out of ten. The solution comes with a high price tag, while some of the competitors provide identical functionality in their offerings at no extra cost.

The pricing is reasonable. It's not expensive compared to other solutions. If you get the console and other licenses, you can easily use it with other QRadar solutions.

The solution is expensive compared to other products, and I rate the pricing a five out of ten.

I rate the price a six out of ten, with ten being affordable and one being expensive. They recently changed their licensing model, and it's more complex.

The pricing is higher but cheaper than others and there are no additional costs.

The solution has a licensing model that is based on events per second so it scales to need and budget. At the time of deployment, we were premium partners with IBM so received advantageous pricing. The on-premises solution and its license are not impacted by the number of users so it is easy to add staff.

I have no information about the licensing costs of IBM QRadar, and whether or not it requires a license.

I do not know the exact cost. It's a bit tricky as some of it is tied into pre-contracts that we have. Some parts of the company do prepaid funds for certain solutions. It's different. It varies.

This is a free solution which is one of the main reasons we chose it. It's just a matter of getting a license for the curator as a platform.

I have no idea what QRadar UBA costs as a standalone solution because it is bundled with the QRoC security operation center and several other modules that we pay for in a big lump sum. However, I don't think that part is too expensive. It's a plugin to the QRadar SIEM that feeds off the same data. We have X-Force Threat Exchange, so IBM is operating the SIEM for us. I say to them, "I want UBA," and there it is.

We pay approximately $40,000 to use the solution annually. This solution is a lot less expensive than Splunk.

QRadar is reasonable compared to LogRhythm.

There is an annual license required for this solution.

You have a one-time payment, and you also can purchase it for one year as a subscription. We have it on-premise, and we have a permanent license for it. We have to pay for the support on a yearly basis. If you compare its cost with Sentinel for one year, QRadar would seem more expensive, but if you compare its cost over five or ten years, Azure Sentinel will be more expensive than QRadar.

Licensing can be costly depending on your architecture.

Pricing is good.

I pay for licensing yearly.

We pay an annual license fee. On top of that, every model adds to the cost. It's not just the license; the sales people want you to think you're only paying for certain things but we know how it works.

There are different types of subscriptions available. We were on an annual subscription, but our customers typically choose the two years subscription option.

There is a license to use this solution, which is paid annually. However, there are subscription options available.

Licensing costs are reasonable.

SIEM is quite a pricey solution so we only offer it to enterprise companies that can pay the fees. For smaller companies, it's an extremely expensive product.

The price could be better. I bought a subscription for three years.

Implementation is over time and the maintenance price for QRadar is competitive.

On-premises is pretty expensive as opposed to the cloud. You do need to pay for a year subscription. You are charged at events per second as well.

The price of this solution is reasonable.

It could be cheaper, but the value itself is far more important for us than the price. Typically, our clients have yearly subscriptions.

It is overly expensive and overly complex in terms of licensing. They have many different appliances, which makes it extremely difficult to choose the technology. It is very difficult to choose the technology or QRadar components that you should be deploying. They have improved some of it in the last few years. They have made it slightly easy with the fact that you can now buy virtual versions of all the appliances, which is good, but it is still very fragmented. For instance, on some of the smaller appliances, there is no upgrade path. So, if you exceed the capacity of the appliance, you have to buy a bigger appliance, which is not helpful because it is quite a major cost. If you want to add more disks to the system, they'll say that you can't. If they ship a disk with 2 terabytes that the older appliances have, and you say to them that you can commercially get 10 terabyte disks, they will say this is not possible, even though there is no technical reason why it cannot be done. So, they're not very flexible from that point of view. For IBM, it is good because you basically have to buy new appliances, but from a customer's point of view, it is a very expensive investment.

The license is a yearly one.

There is a license required for this solution.

IBM QRadar is a little bit expensive compared to other products.

The pricing is always fine.

This price is a little high, so it's an expensive product. It is a good solution but not a cheap one.

IBM QRadar is pricey, and therefore, usually small enterprises are not able to afford it. Usually, probably most of the customers are usually large enterprises.

When compared with other SIEM solutions, QRadar is considerably less expensive. I would like to compare it with Elasticsearch because they have different pricing strategies. QRadar is events per second, EPS-based, whereas Elasticsearch is resource-based. You have to estimate based on how many resources will be used in the infrastructure, irrespective of log resources and log volumes. They are charging based on the resources.

There is a license required for this solution. There are some limitations depending on what license you purchase.

The pricing of the solution is quite reasonable.

The license is not subscription-based. We have been doing the same deployment for more than ten years. The pricing is alright.

As compared to LogRhythm, IBM QRadar's pricing is moderate.

There is a license required for this solution and it is an annual payment. I have found all solutions in the category to be expensive, including Splunk.

The price of this solution is a little high.

IBM Qradar has an interesting scheme for payments. They have annual payments for customers who use subscriptions for some services. I can't see any problem with the current financial scheme for this product generally. It's okay.

They can give us some scalability and flexibility on pricing. If its pricing can be reduced, it would help a lot of customers in bringing in a new SIEM environment and grow business in the market. If I start a license today and take around 10,000 EPS, and after a month, there is an increase in the number of clients on my platform, I can increase the number of licenses. I can add 5,000 EPS on a yearly basis.

The product is not a cheap solution. it's quite expensive. We do also pay more in order to use Watson.

When it comes to the initial pricing there can be a huge discount from there side and also I think they are open to competing with other products. Even though the price can be a little high sometimes there product is number one. They have a wide range of products.

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.

The solution is priced fairly, there is a license for the solution, and we pay annually.

We use QRadar as a managed service and we pay licensing fees to the partner.

The NEMA licensing structure is very easy. It's far better than the previous licensing structure they had. They charge you based on the number of events per second and flows per second, and that's the beauty of it. The rest of the components are complimentary. That's it. It's not a complex process of licensing anymore. It's very simple and straightforward.

It would be great if this product were cheaper.

Our licensing is yearly. But it's based on Event Per Second, which is one of the models. Storage capacity for log management is also considered with the fees. Licensing is a bit complex in IBM, as well. Different aspects needs to be considered.

I think that the price is fair, but we can always say that the price could be cheaper.

It is costlier as compared to the other alternatives available in the market.

The price can be expensive, however, it's all relative, as it helps speed up development, which can save money for the organization. The payments for the product are made on a yearly basis.

Its price is good in terms of efficiency and the number of people required for implementing various things. You might pay more in terms of money, but you might save on the number of people. For example, if you are using Kibana, you have to pay more for people or experts, which is not the case with IBM QRadar.

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.

The IBM QRadar Licensing for the core Events(EPS) and Flows(FPS) is per second based. The licensing is perpetual and surely expensive but the output of the Product makes it worth your money.

It's very expensive but it fits our budget. Because it's very expensive, we had to come up with ways of filtering our logs before they get into QRadar because otherwise, we'd have to buy a much greater amount of events per second, and that would be very expensive. Splunk is virtually the same price.

The pricing is okay, it's comparable to other vendors. It's not expensive for the resources that it gives you.

The price of this product is high.

It's free of charge.

Regarding the price, it is a bit high for normal customers. It is better for enterprise-class customers where they get a licensing model for MSSP for enterprises.

There are more costs in addition to standard licensing; support, building.

The price is very high. Some of our customers cannot afford it.

This is not a trivial undertaking. You will need at least one experienced user and considerable infrastructure to support this if you use the on-prem version which we did. The cloud version has less overhead but there are some limitations so choose carefully.

The licensing is every year. There are additional costs, such as the cost associated with the different hardware required for implementation and deployment. Along with the add-on apps, these are all additional costs, and they require licensing as well.

The solution is a subscription-based model. It is a yearly subscription from my understanding. In terms of additional costs, it depends on the subscription that you choose. There are plenty of options to choose from. There is the EPS licensing cost (Event per second licensing), which is a parameter that you choose. By adding countries to our solution, we have to increase the EPS.

Our licensing costs for this solution is on a yearly basis.

We do licensing on a yearly basis. It's for deployment. If the client wants more services, we support the license. There are no other costs for the product.

QRadar is quite expensive. It wouldn't be worth it for a small business unless, through a third-party company, they used it in a software-as-a-service type of arrangement, rather than buying the licenses outright. There are additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees. For example, there are add-ons like the QRadar Vulnerability Manager.

IBM has subscriptions plans that run for one year.

We do licenses once a year.

The licensing depends on the customer. The pricing is good.

It's too expensive. The licensing is also a little bit difficult to understand because you have to license it per event and per number of flows. So you have to understand the difference between a flow and an event, and then you have to forward that to the resellers, the distributors, and to IBM. That part took a long time for us. Now we're adjusted to the process.

It's too expensive.

Licensing is very expensive, IBM QRadar is a very expensive solution. If you want to minimize costs then IBM QRadar is not for you.

It is cheaper than ArcSight.

The cost of this product is expensive.

It is a pricey product. It is very expensive.

I do not have control over pricing, though I do help customers with their sizing.

IBM is a Ferrari if you are beginning with a concept. If it will be a pilot project, take a look at Red Hat Process Automation Manager or jBPM. Be realistic about the users' quantity. A good approach would be to begin with an On Cloud subscription, then later on do a more exact sizing.

Pricing and licensing are competitive. Their new licensing options allow logs to bypass the correlation engine for a flat rate, which is also appealing for log data that is compliance-driven for a small amount of money.

Think what you will integrate into QRadar. It is a SIEM. You need to send it logs, but not everything. Pricing (based on EPS) will be more accurate.

It is expensive. It is not a product that I can provide for SMBs. It is a program that I can only provide for really large enterprises. Also, the maintenance costs are high.