In our comparison of F5 vs. QRadar SIEM, QRadar SIEM is the best option with a higher overall Wheelhouse Score. Wheelhouse Score uses a combination of feature and pricing comparison data, average user ratings, and editorial reviews to score software vendors on a scale of 1-10.
* Vendor does not share prices.
* Vendor does not share prices.
If you require detailed application security and want to configure your WAF to combat OWASP top 10 threats, F5 ASM (or WAF) is an excellent choice. While there are other vendors in the market offering similar capabilities, F5 ASM stands out in terms of configurability and addressing specific security requirements.
The strength of F5 Application Security Firewall is impressive. With a single click and a license, you can enable WAF on the F5 Load Balancer. F5 offers a unified appliance that combines load balancing and WAF functionalities. This means that while load balancing your application, you don't need to route user requests to separate products. F5 inspects user requests for security purposes during the load balancing process. The configuration options for application security are comprehensive, and the WAF learns the application to effectively block unwanted traffic.
Configuring F5 WAF requires deep knowledge and expertise. The configuration GUI can be complex, leading to potential confusion during the setup process. Additionally, the price of the solution is quite high.
QRadar effectively addresses the need to monitor, investigate, detect, and respond to threats on devices and endpoints within the environment. Its logs retention capability is commendable, and it efficiently collates and analyzes large amounts of data from both cloud and on-site sources, providing valuable insights for security operations.
One of the best aspects of QRadar is its ability to assist in threat detection and response, providing a comprehensive solution for remediating threats. Its open architecture allows for deployment on various platforms, including on-premises, cloud, or as a service. The integration capabilities with EDR, SIEM, SOAR, and other threat intelligence tools enable a unified and comprehensive XDR approach.
There are a few areas that could be improved. The EPS cap, which limits the number of logs that can be integrated into QRadar, can sometimes result in generating false positives. Additionally, the user-friendliness of the platform could be enhanced, especially in terms of setting rules, which can be a bit challenging.
F5 BIG-IP Advanced Web Application Firewall addresses our organization's need for protecting and load balancing all external applications. By leveraging the WAF functionality, we can secure every application that is exposed to the outside. The combination of WAF and load balancing features provides significant benefits in terms of security and performance."
One of the standout features is the automatic updating of signatures, relieving the concern of manual updates. The bot defense capability is highly valuable, and the ability to easily identify blocked URLs from the logs is a great advantage.
The user interface could be improved to enhance user-friendliness. F5 should invest in refining the interface for a more intuitive and user-friendly experience.
IBM QRadar serves as a valuable SIEM tool that enhances the portfolio of offerings, especially when used alongside MDR services. It provides valuable insights into the latest cyber threats and offers various log types for the monitoring team, benefiting the overall security and threat detection capabilities.
The integration of threat intelligence feeds with QRadar is outstanding, providing valuable and insightful information. Additionally, the graphical user interface (GUI) of the tool is impressive and well-designed, catering to the needs of analysts.
One drawback of QRadar is its high license cost, which can be expensive for organizations. Additionally, customization requests and configuring specific use cases incur additional charges. Another aspect that could be improved is the response time of the support team, as they tend to take longer to address queries or issues.
If you require detailed application security and want to configure your WAF to combat OWASP top 10 threats, F5 ASM (or WAF) is an excellent choice. While there are other vendors in the market offering similar capabilities, F5 ASM stands out in terms of configurability and addressing specific security requirements.
The strength of F5 Application Security Firewall is impressive. With a single click and a license, you can enable WAF on the F5 Load Balancer. F5 offers a unified appliance that combines load balancing and WAF functionalities. This means that while load balancing your application, you don't need to route user requests to separate products. F5 inspects user requests for security purposes during the load balancing process. The configuration options for application security are comprehensive, and the WAF learns the application to effectively block unwanted traffic.
Configuring F5 WAF requires deep knowledge and expertise. The configuration GUI can be complex, leading to potential confusion during the setup process. Additionally, the price of the solution is quite high.
F5 BIG-IP Advanced Web Application Firewall addresses our organization's need for protecting and load balancing all external applications. By leveraging the WAF functionality, we can secure every application that is exposed to the outside. The combination of WAF and load balancing features provides significant benefits in terms of security and performance."
One of the standout features is the automatic updating of signatures, relieving the concern of manual updates. The bot defense capability is highly valuable, and the ability to easily identify blocked URLs from the logs is a great advantage.
The user interface could be improved to enhance user-friendliness. F5 should invest in refining the interface for a more intuitive and user-friendly experience.
QRadar effectively addresses the need to monitor, investigate, detect, and respond to threats on devices and endpoints within the environment. Its logs retention capability is commendable, and it efficiently collates and analyzes large amounts of data from both cloud and on-site sources, providing valuable insights for security operations.
One of the best aspects of QRadar is its ability to assist in threat detection and response, providing a comprehensive solution for remediating threats. Its open architecture allows for deployment on various platforms, including on-premises, cloud, or as a service. The integration capabilities with EDR, SIEM, SOAR, and other threat intelligence tools enable a unified and comprehensive XDR approach.
There are a few areas that could be improved. The EPS cap, which limits the number of logs that can be integrated into QRadar, can sometimes result in generating false positives. Additionally, the user-friendliness of the platform could be enhanced, especially in terms of setting rules, which can be a bit challenging.
IBM QRadar serves as a valuable SIEM tool that enhances the portfolio of offerings, especially when used alongside MDR services. It provides valuable insights into the latest cyber threats and offers various log types for the monitoring team, benefiting the overall security and threat detection capabilities.
The integration of threat intelligence feeds with QRadar is outstanding, providing valuable and insightful information. Additionally, the graphical user interface (GUI) of the tool is impressive and well-designed, catering to the needs of analysts.
One drawback of QRadar is its high license cost, which can be expensive for organizations. Additionally, customization requests and configuring specific use cases incur additional charges. Another aspect that could be improved is the response time of the support team, as they tend to take longer to address queries or issues.
Add suggested to comparison
In our rating and review comparison of F5 vs. QRadar SIEM, F5 has 6 user reviews and QRadar SIEM has 26. The average star rating for F5 is 4.83 while QRadar SIEM has an average rating of 4.15. F5 has more positive reviews than QRadar SIEM. Comparing F5 vs. QRadar SIEM reviews, F5 has stronger overall reviews.
F5 vs. QRadar SIEM both offer a strong set of features and functionality including Cybersecurity Features, Cybersecurity Protection Types, Reporting & Analytics, Device Management, Identity and Access Management (IAM), Password Management, Disaster Recovery, Reminders/Alerts, Workflow Automation, Systems/Administrative, Configuration Management, Integration Options, Supported Technologies, After-Sales Service. In our feature comparison of F5 vs. QRadar SIEM, QRadar SIEM offers more of the most popular features and tools than F5.
In our pricing comparison of F5 vs. QRadar SIEM, QRadar SIEM's pricing starts at N/A/month and is more affordable compared to QRadar SIEM's starting cost of N/A/month.
Our comparison of F5 vs. QRadar SIEM shows that QRadar SIEM scores higher in usability for setup & support, quality of support, ease of admin. F5 scores higher in ease of use, meets requirements, but QRadar SIEM has the best scores overall for system usability.
Get your personalized recommendations now.
