No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ESET Inspect vs IBM Security QRadar comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (5th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
33rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Security QRadar
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
217
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (6th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (2nd), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (2nd), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (5th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Security QRadar is 1.9%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.4%
IBM Security QRadar1.9%
ESET Inspect1.1%
Other93.6%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
Moshiur-Rahman Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at IOPoint.com
Provides reliable and comprehensive internet security solutions without significant system slowdowns
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side, we utilize it on our Windows Server.  The platform has improved our organization's security by providing comprehensive antivirus and internet security solutions. It is fast and…
HarshBhardiya - PeerSpot reviewer
SOC Engineer at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Have managed daily asset and alert monitoring effectively but have encountered limitations with manual processes and interface usability
It's still very manual and doesn't work on its own. It's still in an early stage and not on par where we can consider it a really successful detection system. The accuracy is not there. The UI could be better when compared to Sentinels where we can use flags and tagging. It could be much more user-friendly. IBM Security QRadar has all features and is fully competitive with other SIEM tools, but when it comes to user-friendliness, a new user takes time to get used to it. More intuitive, user-friendly interfaces and more helpful documentation would be beneficial. The query searching and data fetching could be faster. In large to very large organizations with around 5,000 or 6,000 assets or beyond, even with proper configurations and RAM and hardware backing up, the query is fairly slow.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us."
"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."
"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."
"If any application performs suspicious activities, such as changing registries or modifying other applications, Cortex XDR detects and blocks the entire application."
"The solution's stability is generally good."
"It collects and caches and the knowledge of machine learning from different customers to take to the cloud, it makes it better to use for everybody, it allows for quick learning and updates and can, therefore, offer zero-day malware security, and this sharing of metadata helps make the solution very safe."
"Automation and playbooks have helped me significantly, as Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, efficiently detecting and blocking malicious attacks with firewalls while eliminating workload and speeding responses for next-generation operations."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"The simplicity of the solution is the best feature."
"I have found its network traffic log, network bit log, and QBI most valuable."
"One of the most valuable features is its ability to integrate with other solutions. IBM has a lot of solutions and we have managed to make it work with IBM BigFix and MaaS360, and even Microsoft."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with the GRD, for banking."
"IBM QRadar is great help from its security event monitoring to data center and NOC troubleshooting of issues hard for other departments to spot."
"An engineer can live-monitor all the flow happening in real-time. This would help us a lot while investigating a case, and it would even help us with preventive actions."
"When it comes to QRadar, they can do the correlation and not only in networks but also endpoints. This is one of the good features that we have noticed."
"We are using the platform version, which I like."
 

Cons

"Cortex XDR is trickier to configure than other Palo Alto products. This is one area where we are not so satisfied."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"The solution should offer more dashboards and they should be better customized."
"Every 30 or 40 days, there's a new version and we need to go and make sure our customer's laptops are upgraded."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a strong tool, but it is true that digesting information sometimes makes the tool go a little bit slower."
"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"The platform's price could be better."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"The modularity could be improved."
"It's still very manual and doesn't work on its own. It's still in an early stage and not on par where we can consider it a really successful detection system."
"The API integration for AD is a problem when it comes to vulnerability management. If you want to incorporate multiple factor authentication it becomes a problem with the AD. It doesn't integrate well. That needs to be improved."
"The user interface needs improvement."
"Technical support is good, but not great."
"I would suggest QRadar release any documentation or give an online demo, like videos on YouTube. It would increase publicity and public appeal."
"They need to improve their threat intelligence feed and they need to improve their user behavior analytics modules."
"For us, it's kind of wonky because we always try to be bleeding edge and always try to do updates."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has a higher cost than other solutions, like CrowdStrike or Microsoft’s EDR tools, but it reduces the cost of our operations because it’s a new generation antivirus tool."
"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"When compared with other SIM solutions, QRadar is considerably less expensive."
"Only enterprise businesses can afford the tool."
"IBM Security QRadar is a very expensive tool."
"QRadar UBA's price is a little more than street price and could be reduced."
"The tool is priced in a competitive manner. The tool's price is dependent on the installation and the product size, but it is competitive in the marketplace."
"IBM's Qradar is not for small companie. Unfortunately, it would be 'overkill' to place it plainly. The pricing would be too much."
"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 pricing is good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Jun 28, 2015
Qradar vs. ArcSight
Continuing with the SIEM posts we have done at Infosecnirvana, this post is a Head to head comparison of the two Industry leading SIEM products in the market – HP ArcSight and IBM QRadar Both the products have consistently been in the Gartner Leaders Quadrant. Both HP and IBM took over niche SIEM…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business45
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise48
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business91
Midsize Enterprise39
Large Enterprise105
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ESET Inspect?
The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward. We purchase soft keys, install them, and manage the licen...
What needs improvement with ESET Inspect?
One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security.
What is your primary use case for ESET Inspect?
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side...
What are the biggest differences between Securonix UEBA, Exabeam, and IBM QRadar?
It mostly depends on your use-cases and environment. Exabeam and Securonix have a stronger UEBA feature set, friendli...
What SOC product do you recommend?
For tools I’d recommend: -SIEM- LogRhythm -SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Security QRadar?
Pricing and the license of EPS were managed by the governance team. I was not responsible for managing those. I was s...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
IBM QRadar, QRadar SIEM, QRadar UBA, QRadar on Cloud, IBM QRadar Advisor with Watson
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Clients across multiple industries, such as energy, financial, retail, healthcare, government, communications, and education use QRadar.
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. IBM Security QRadar and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.