We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"It's very, very versatile."
"The user interface is really modern. As an end-user, there are a lot of possibilities to tailor the platform to your needs, and that can be done without needing much support from Devo. It's really flexible and modular. The UI is very clean."
"Those 400 days of hot data mean that people can look for trends and at what happened in the past. And they can not only do so from a security point of view, but even for operational use cases. In the past, our operational norm was to keep live data for only 30 days. Our users were constantly asking us for at least 90 days, and we really couldn't even do that. That's one reason that having 400 days of live data is pretty huge. As our users start to use it and adopt this system, we expect people to be able to do those long-term analytics."
"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"The thing that Devo does better than other solutions is to give me the ability to write queries that look at multiple data sources and run fast. Most SIEMs don't do that. And I can do that by creating entity-based queries. Let's say I have a table which has Okta, a table which has G Suite, a table which has endpoint telemetry, and I have a table which has DNS telemetry. I can write a query that says, 'Join all these things together on IP, and where the IP matches in all these tables, return to me that subset of data, within these time windows.' I can break it down that way."
"One of the biggest features of the UI is that you see the actual code of what you're doing in the graphical user interface, in a little window on the side. Whatever you're doing, you see the code, what's happening. And you can really quickly switch between using the GUI and using the code. That's really useful."
"The real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"In traditional BI solutions, you need to wait a lot of time to have the ability to create visualizations with the data and to do searches. With this kind of platform, you have that information in real-time."
"Straightforward to integrate and automate."
"We find they have a very helpful alert system."
"I like that you can build out a dashboard pretty quickly. There are some things that come out of the box that you don't really need to do, which is great because they're default settings."
"Sometimes it's more user friendly for development teams. There are some parts of Datadog that are more understandable for development teams. For example, the APM in Datadog works more manually and works like the tools in New Relic or Grafana, or Elastic. It is easier to understand for software development teams."
"Its logs are most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the dashboards that are provided out of the box, as well as ones we were able to configure."
"The fact that everything is under a single pane of glass is really valuable, as developers don't have to spend their time copying correlation IDs across tools to find what they need."
"Datadog's ability to group and visualize the servers and the data makes it relatively easy for the root cause analysis."
"In terms of security, LogRhythm NextGen SIEM is great."
"Technical support is very helpful and responsive."
"I would say the most valuable feature of LogRhythm is that it has built-in UEBA functionality, among other basic Windows packages."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"The product is great for medium to large-scale organizations."
"Automations are very valuable. It provides the ability to automate some of our small use cases. The ability to integrate with other products that use an API is also very useful. LogRhythm has a plugin for it that we can connect and start to move down towards the path of a single pane of glass instead of having multiple or different tools."
"The most valuable feature is that we can alternate incident automations."
"I have found the Advanced Intelligence Engine has provided the most value to us because we can customize alarms based on our requirements and have created hundreds of alarms that notify different people for different scenarios."
"From our experience, the Devo agent needs some work. They built it on top of OS Query's open-source framework. It seems like it wasn't tuned properly to handle a large volume of Windows event logs. In our experience, there would definitely be some room for improvement. A lot of SIEMs on the market have their own agent infrastructure. I think Devo's working towards that, but I think that it needs some improvement as far as keeping up with high-volume environments."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
"The Activeboards feature is not as mature regarding the look and feel. Its functionality is mature, but the look and feel is not there. For example, if you have some data sets and are trying to get some graphics, you cannot change anything. There's just one format for the graphics. You cannot change the size of the font, the font itself, etc."
"Some basic reporting mechanisms have room for improvement. Customers can do analysis by building Activeboards, Devo’s name for interactive dashboards. This capability is quite nice, but it is not a reporting engine. Devo does provide mechanisms to allow third-party tools to query data via their API, which is great. However, a lot of folks like or want a reporting engine, per se, and Devo simply doesn't have that. This may or may not be by design."
"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
"Devo has a lot of cloud connectors, but they need to do a little bit of work there. They've got good integrations with the public cloud, but there are a lot of cloud SaaS systems that they still need to work with on integrations, such as Salesforce and other SaaS providers where we need to get access logs."
"The Log Explorer could be better. I don't think it has log manipulation as Splunk does."
"In the past two years, there have been a couple of outages."
"Additional metrics should be included."
"Datadog has a lot of documentation, but a lot of that documentation assumes you know how the service works, which can lead to confusion."
"It can have a more modernized pricing mechanism. We're actually working with them to figure out how to become more modular and have a better and more modernized pricing mechanism. The issue with Datadog is that you have to buy the whole suite of different products, and you kind of get stuck in the old utilization of 40% of their suite. Most organizations today break down between application development, networking, and security. Therefore, there should be a way to break down different modules into just app dev, infosec, networking, etc. Customers have various needs across their business lines, and sometimes, they're just not willing to have tools that they're not using 100%. AppDynamics is probably a little bit better in terms of being modular."
"The incident management beta looks promising, but it is still missing the ability to automatically create incidents based on certain alerts."
"Could be a little more user friendly."
"The pricing model could be simplified as it feels a bit outdated, especially when you look at the billing model of compute instances vs the containers instances."
"It should have some more message monitoring features. It can also have some free message monitoring tools."
"Scalability-wise, it's not that great."
"There used to be the ability to create alarms based on message text that was included in LR Version 6.x that has been removed in LogRhythm 7.x, and on that, I would like to see it added back."
"I think there is room for improvement because the system is still running on the Windows Server platform. The problem with running on Windows is that it is not that good for scaling and providing for big deployment environments."
"We need to get better training for things like creating code and playlists. The way it's done now takes a long time."
"Their ticketing system for managing cases can be improved. They can either do that or adopt some of the open-source ticket systems into theirs. The current system works and gets the job done, but it is very bare-bones and basic. There are some things that could be improved there. They should also bring in more threat intelligence into the product and also probably start to look into the integration of more cloud or SAS products for ingesting logs. They're doing the work, but with the explosion of COVID, a lot of businesses have started to move towards more cloud applications or SAS applications. There is a whole diverse suite of SAS products out there, which is a challenge for them and I get it. They seem to be focusing on the big ones, but it'll be nice to be able to, for example, pull in Microsoft logs from Office 365. They are working towards a better way of doing that, and they have a product in the pipeline to pull logs in from other SAS applications. The biggest thing for them is going to be moving away from a Windows Server infrastructure into a straight-up Linux, which is more stable in my eyes. For the backend, they can maybe move into more of an up-to-date Elastic search engine and use less of Microsoft products."
"Parsing is totally controlled by LogRhythm and they do not allow any partner or any third-party to handle this part and this is a key challenge on my end."
"For our market, the solution is quite expensive. It would be ideal if they could work on and improve their existing pricing plans to help make it more affordable in our country."
"I like the pricing very much. They keep it simple. It is a single price based on data ingested, and they do it on an average. If you get a spike of data that flows in, they will not stick it to you or charge you for that. They are very fair about that."
"We have an OEM agreement with Devo. It is very similar to the standard licensing agreement because we are charged in the same way as any other customer, e.g., we use the backroom."
"I'm not involved in the financial aspect, but I think the licensing costs are similar to other solutions. If all the solutions have a similar cost, Devo provides more for the money."
"It's a per gigabyte cost for ingestion of data. For every gigabyte that you ingest, it's whatever you negotiated your price for. Compared to other contracts that we've had for cloud providers, it's significantly less."
"Devo is definitely cheaper than Splunk. There's no doubt about that. The value from Devo is good. It's definitely more valuable to me than QRadar or LogRhythm or any of the old, traditional SIEMs."
"Our licensing fees are billed annually and per terabyte."
"Devo was very cost-competitive... Devo did come with that 400 days of hot data, and that was not the case with other products."
"Be cautious of metadata inclusion for log types in pricing, as there are some "gotchas" with that."
"It didn't scale well from the cost perspective. We had a custom package deal."
"Our licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis."
"They prefer monthly subscriptions."
"If you do your homework, you'll find that if you're really concerned with cost, it's good."
"Datadog does not provide any free plans to use the solution. When I start with a proof of concept it would be sensible to have a free plan to test the tool and check whether it fits the requirements of the project. Before the production stage, it is always good to have a free plan with some limited features, number of requests, or logs."
"The price is better than some competing products."
"Pricing is somewhat affordable compared to other solutions but in order to really lower the costs of other products you need to plan very carefully your resources usage, otherwise, it can get expensive real quick."
"Pricing seemed easy until the bill came in and some things were not accounted for."
"In the context of our country, the price of this solution is too high."
"The setup and licensing for small and medium size businesses is straightforward, though when it comes to the enterprise it pays to keep in mind the possibility for complications given all the extras and add-ons that may be required."
"We did a five-year agreement. We pay close to a quarter of a million dollars for our solution."
"It costs a great amount, but its pricing is competitive with some of the other vendors. For licensing and support, we pay about 20,000. There are no additional costs or anything like that."
Devo is the only cloud-native logging and security analytics platform that releases the full potential of all your data to empower bold, confident action when it matters most. Only the Devo platform delivers the powerful combination of real-time visibility, high-performance analytics, scalability, multitenancy, and low TCO crucial for monitoring and securing business operations as enterprises accelerate their shift to the cloud.
LogRhythm is a world leader in NextGen SIEM, empowering thousands of enterprises on six continents to successfully reduce cyber and operational risk by rapidly detecting, responding to and neutralizing damaging cyberthreats. The LogRhythm NextGen SIEM Platform combines advanced security analytics; user and entity behavior analytics (UEBA); network detection and response (NDR); and security orchestration, automation, and response (SOAR) in a single end- to-end solution.
LogRhythm’s technology serves as the foundation for the world’s most modern enterprise security operations centers (SOCs), helping customers measurably secure their cloud, physical, and virtual infrastructures for both IT and OT environments. Built for security professionals by security professionals, the LogRhythm NextGen SIEM Platform has won countless customer and industry accolades. For more information, visit logrhythm.com.
See how Devo allows you to free yourself from data management, and make machine data and insights accessible.
Datadog is ranked 3rd in Log Management with 24 reviews while LogRhythm NextGen SIEM is ranked 9th in Log Management with 9 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.4, while LogRhythm NextGen SIEM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Provides insightful analytics and good visibility that assist with making architectural decisions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of LogRhythm NextGen SIEM writes "It puts things together and provides the evidence and has good automation and integration capabilities". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Splunk, ELK Logstash, New Relic APM and AppDynamics, whereas LogRhythm NextGen SIEM is most compared with Splunk, IBM QRadar, ELK Logstash, Graylog and Fortinet FortiAnalyzer. See our Datadog vs. LogRhythm NextGen SIEM report.
See our list of best Log Management 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.