Devo vs NetWitness Platform comparison

Devo and NetWitness are both solutions in the Log Management category. Devo is ranked #28 with an average rating of 8.0, while NetWitness is ranked #35 with an average rating of 8.3. Devo holds a 0.8% mindshare in Log Management, compared to NetWitness’s 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Devo users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 75% of NetWitness users who would recommend it.

Devo

Read 23 Devo reviews

3,179 Views
1,590 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

NetWitness Platform

Read 36 NetWitness Platform reviews

2,149 Views
1,117 Comparison Views

75% willing to recommend

Devo

NetWitness Platform

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

NetWitness Platform and Devo are two prominent solutions in cybersecurity. Devo seems to have the upper hand due to its scalability and flexible data ingestion, making it suitable for complex environments.

Features: NetWitness Platform offers comprehensive threat detection, forensic analysis, and deep network insights. Devo provides scalability, flexible data ingestion, and extensive analytics features with a granular level of detail.

Room for Improvement: NetWitness Platform needs to enhance integration capabilities, simplify operational complexities, and improve usability. Devo requires more refined real-time alerting mechanisms, an improved search function, and additional user-friendly enhancements.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: NetWitness Platform's deployment is intricate and time-consuming, requiring significant expertise, but it has responsive and helpful customer support. Devo offers a smoother, quicker deployment process and provides substantial guidance, although some users mention longer wait times for support.

Pricing and ROI: NetWitness Platform involves higher initial setup costs but delivers solid ROI through robust performance. Devo offers flexible pricing models that appeal to a range of budgets, and despite higher costs, its extensive features justify the price with users reporting satisfactory ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Devo vs. NetWitness Platform Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Devo vs. NetWitness Platform

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 peers since 2012

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

Devo

Ranking in Log Management

28th

Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)

25th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

IT Operations Analytics (11th), AIOps (20th)

NetWitness Platform

Ranking in Log Management

35th

Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)

32nd

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of Devo is 0.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetWitness Platform is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Log Management Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Devo	0.8%
NetWitness Platform	0.7%
Other	98.5%

Log Management

Featured Reviews

Francisco JavierRomo

Strategic Account Executive at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

Has improved investigative workflows with interactive dashboards and simplified data correlation

The data analytics cloud component focuses on real-time analytics, which is very impressive. The SIEM collects and correlates logs data from different sources and can integrate with ServiceNow, hardware asset management, and software asset management. The security orchestration, automation, and response (SOAR) is another valuable feature. The security data platform serves as the foundation of Devo. Regarding advanced query capabilities, Devo offers several models including query logs, visual query builder, language integrated query, and SQL, with SQL being the most frequently used querying data capability. The single pane of glass that Devo offers is the SOC. The tools in Devo's active ports are for investigating, not just viewing data. They are more interactive than other market solutions. The drill-down reports capabilities allow analysts to click on any element in a widget. When they see a spike in a line chart for a failed login, which could be a true or false attempt, they can click that spike, and a table widget on the same active board instantly populates with raw logs of data for those specific failed logins. This is particularly important for enterprise companies with numerous endpoints and users. The dynamic filtering of inputs significantly reduces the time cybersecurity analysts spend trying to figure out failed logins and identifying false positives.

Read full review

MOTASHIM Al Razi

CISO at One Bank Limited

It is a stable solution, but they should make the user interface easier to understand

The solution's initial setup takes work. We have to organize multiple paths and many features. The deployment process takes less than a week. But it takes a month to complete if we want to make the solution smarter by integrating it with various devices. I rate the process as a six out of ten.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Being able to build and modify dashboards on the fly with Activeboards streamlines my analyst time because my analysts aren't doing it across spreadsheets or five different tools to try to build a timeline out themselves. They can just ingest it all, build a timeline out across all the logging, and all the different information sources in one dashboard. So, it's a huge time saver. It also has the accuracy of being able to look at all those data sources in one view. The log analysis, which would take 40 hours, we can probably get through it in about five to eight hours using Devo."

"The drill-down reports capabilities allow analysts to click on any element in a widget. When they see a spike in a line chart for a failed login, which could be a true or false attempt, they can click that spike, and a table widget on the same active board instantly populates with raw logs of data for those specific failed logins."

"The most valuable feature is that it has native MSSP capabilities and maintains perfect data separation. It does all of that in a very easy-to-manage cloud-based solution."

"Devo provides a multi-tenant, cloud-native architecture. This is critical for managed service provider environments or multinational organizations who may have subsidiaries globally. It gives organizations a way to consolidate their data in a single accessible location, yet keep the data separate. This allows for global views and/or isolated views restricted by access controls by company or business unit."

"The most useful feature for us, because of some of the issues we had previously, was the simplicity of log integrations. It's much easier with this platform to integrate log sources that might not have standard logging and things like that."

"The ability to have high performance, high-speed search capability is incredibly important for us. When it comes to doing security analysis, you don't want to be doing is sitting around waiting to get data back while an attacker is sitting on a network, actively attacking it. You need to be able to answer questions quickly. If I see an indicator of attack, I need to be able to rapidly pivot and find data, then analyze it and find more data to answer more questions. You need to be able to do that quickly. If I'm sitting around just waiting to get my first response, then it ends up moving too slow to keep up with the attacker. Devo's speed and performance allows us to query in real-time and keep up with what is actually happening on the network, then respond effectively to events."

"The most valuable feature is definitely the ability that Devo has to ingest data. From the previous SIEM that I came from and helped my company administer, it really was the type of system where data was parsed on ingest. This meant that if you didn't build the parser efficiently or correctly, sometimes that would bring the system to its knees. You'd have a backlog of processing the logs as it was ingesting them."

"The most powerful feature is the way the data is stored and extracted. The data is always stored in its original format and you can normalize the data after it has been stored."

More Devo pros

"It gives the capability for the incident response team to correlate logs to identify any kind of problem like malware and incidents in a general sense, both for logs and packets."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to write rules and triggers for network communication, and then being able to investigate based on that."

"Alerting Module: It provides real-time event processing language on all the logs/packets stream for advanced alerting, i.e., using SQL LIKE statements."

"The most valuable features are its ingestion of logs and raising of alerts based on those logs."

"What we are mainly using are the RSA concentrator, RSA Decoder, Archiver, Broker, and Log Decoder."

"It's fully scalable. There is no limit. Of course, the license limits per day the number of terabytes. In my opinion, it's very flexible."

"The most valuable features are the integration and ease of use."

"Possibility to investigate incidents based on logs and raw packets, such as extracting files sent over the network"

More NetWitness Platform pros

Cons

"An admin who is trying to audit user activity usually cannot go beyond a day in the UI. I would like to have access to pages and pages of that data, going back as far as the storage we have, so I could look at every command or search or deletion or anything that a user has run. As an admin, that would really help. Going back just a day in the UI is not going to help, and that means I have to find a different way to do that."

"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."

"I would like to have the ability to create more complex dashboards."

"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."

"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."

"The overall performance of extraction could be a lot faster, but that's a common problem in this space in general. Also, the stock or default alerting and detecting options could definitely be broader and more all-encompassing. The fact that they're not is why we had to write all our own alerts."

"Technical support could be better."

"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."

More Devo cons

"Lots of competing products have vulnerability protection built into their products, and this solution would be improved by including that support."

"The initial setup was complex because it takes a lot of time to complete the implementation."

"Security needs improvement."

"Health monitoring of the event sources and devices."

"It should have a monitoring feature. It would help us analyze the current state of attacks faster from a single platform."

"The tool's integration capability isn't so great."

"Technical support could be improved."

"Its technical support could be better."

More NetWitness Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"The way Devo prices things is based on the amount of data, and I wish the tiers had more granularity. Maybe at this point they do, but when we first negotiated with them, there were only three or four tiers."

"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."

"Pricing is based on the number of gigabytes of ingestion by volume, and it's on a 30-day average. If you go over one day, that's not a big deal as long as the average is what you expected it to be."

"I rate the pricing a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."

"It's very competitive. That was also a primary draw for us. Some of the licensing models with solutions like Splunk and Sentinel were attractive upfront, but there were so many micro-charges and services we would've had to add on to make them what we wanted. We had to include things like SOAR and extended capabilities, whereas all those capabilities are completely included with the Devo platform. I haven't seen any additional fee."

"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."

More Devo pricing and cost advice

"The tool is very expensive, so I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. The solution has an annual subscription."

"The new pricing and licensing mechanisms are fair. I would advise always to get the full solution (i.e., not only Logs)."

"We have a perpetual license, so the total cost of ownership is not very expensive. It's a good investment."

"The NetWitness Platform may be affordable only for enterprise-level customers, as it may not be within the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."

"It is cheap."

"The licenses are good but the cost is very expensive."

"We are on an annual license for the use of the solution."

"The product is expensive."

More NetWitness Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

Vinod Shankar

Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Feb 26, 2015

HP ArcSight vs. IBM QRadar vs. McAfee Nitro vs. Splunk vs. RSA Security vs. LogRhythm

We at Infosecnirvana.com have done several posts on SIEM. After the Dummies Guide on SIEM, we are following it up with a SIEM Product Comparison – 101 deck. So, here it is for your viewing pleasure. Let me know what you think by posting your comments below. The key products compared here are…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

University

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

13%

Performing Arts

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	11

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	20

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Devo?

Compared to Splunk or SentinelOne, it is really expensive. I rate the product’s pricing a nine out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Devo?

The single pane of glass that Devo offers could be improved. The tools in Devo's active ports need enhancement in their investigative capabilities. The drill-down reports capabilities, while useful...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Devo?

During my time at MetaBase Q and as a partner integrator of ServiceNow, I had the chance to understand and be part of projects integrating SOCs, NOCs, and Security Operation Centers with Devo. Most...

See all answers

What do you like most about NetWitness Platform?

The product's initial setup phase was not at all difficult.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetWitness Platform?

The pricing is comparable to others, and I consider the cost to be intermediate. Specific cost details are unknown to me.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetWitness Platform?

There is currently no need for improvement in the SIEM ( /categories/security-information-and-event-management-siem ), though there could be potential enhancements by integrating with AI.

See all answers

Comparisons

LogRhythm SIEM vs Devo

Compared 9% of the time

Splunk Enterprise Security vs Devo

Compared 7% of the time

IBM Security QRadar vs Devo

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Sentinel vs Devo

Compared 4% of the time

Elastic Security vs Devo

Compared 4% of the time

More Devo Competitors

IBM Security QRadar vs NetWitness Platform

Compared 10% of the time

Splunk Enterprise Security vs NetWitness Platform

Compared 7% of the time

Elastic Security vs NetWitness Platform

Compared 6% of the time

USM Anywhere vs NetWitness Platform

Compared 5% of the time

RSA enVision vs NetWitness Platform

Compared 4% of the time

More NetWitness Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Devo

February 2026

Download Devo product report

Buyer's Guide

NetWitness Platform

January 2026

Download NetWitness Platform product report

Also Known As

No data available

RSA Security Analytics

Overview

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.

Devo

NetWitness Platform is an evolved SIEM and threat detection and response solution that functions as a single, unified platform for ALL your security data. It features an advanced analyst workbench for triaging alerts and incidents, and it orchestrates security operations programs end to end. In short: NetWitness Platform is all you need to run an intelligent SOC.

NetWitness

Sample Customers

United States Air Force, Rubrik, SentinelOne, Critical Start, NHL, Panda Security, Telefonica, CaixaBank, OpenText, IGT, OneMain Financial, SurveyMonkey, FanDuel, H&R Block, Ulta Beauty, Manulife, Moneylion, Chime Bank, Magna International, American Express Global Business Travel

Los Angeles World Airports, Reply

Buyer's Guide

Devo vs. NetWitness Platform

February 2026

Free Report: Devo vs. NetWitness Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Devo vs. NetWitness Platform and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Devo vs. NetWitness Platform report.

See our list of best Log Management vendors and best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.