SIEM Tools Compared: Choosing the Right Platform for Security Operations

The Detection Gap

Attackers operate in minutes. Detection takes days. The 2024 IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report found organizations took an average of 204 days to identify a breach and another 73 days to contain it. During those 277 days, attackers move laterally, establish persistence, exfiltrate data, and prepare for impact.

The detection challenge isn't lack of data—it's the opposite. Enterprise security teams face 10,000+ alerts daily from endpoints, cloud workloads, identity systems, and network infrastructure. Without centralized analysis, patterns spanning multiple data sources remain invisible. A compromised credential generating authentication events in Azure AD, spawning unusual processes on endpoints, and triggering anomalous API calls in AWS looks like three unrelated alerts unless you correlate them.

Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) platforms exist to close this gap. They ingest log data from across the environment, normalize it into a common schema, and apply detection logic to identify threats. The best implementations reduce mean time to detect (MTTD) from months to hours. Poor implementations become expensive log storage that nobody queries.

The SIEM market has evolved considerably over the past two years. Cloud-native platforms have matured, major acquisitions have reshaped the vendor landscape, and the line between SIEM and XDR continues to blur. Choosing the right platform requires understanding not just features but also deployment models, pricing structures, and integration capabilities that vary dramatically across vendors.

What Modern SIEM Actually Does

SIEM platforms provide four core capabilities: log aggregation, normalization, detection, and investigation. Understanding what each does—and doesn't do—helps set realistic expectations.

Log aggregation collects events from data sources across your environment. This includes security tools (firewalls, EDR, identity providers), infrastructure (servers, network devices, cloud platforms), and applications. The SIEM becomes the central repository where all security-relevant events live. Data arrives through agents, syslog, APIs, or native cloud integrations depending on the source.

Normalization transforms events from different sources into a common format. A Windows authentication event, a Linux PAM log, and an Okta sign-in event all represent login attempts but arrive with different field names and structures. Normalization maps them to consistent fields (user, source IP, timestamp, outcome) so detection rules and queries can work across all sources.

Detection applies analytics to identify threats. This ranges from simple pattern matching (alert when EventID 4625 occurs more than 10 times in 5 minutes) to behavioral baselines (alert when this user accesses resources they've never touched before). Modern platforms layer multiple detection approaches: correlation rules, statistical anomaly detection, and machine learning models.

Investigation provides the interface for analysts to understand what happened. This includes search and query capabilities, timeline visualization, entity enrichment, and case management. The goal is reducing the time from alert to understanding—assembling context from multiple data sources so analysts can quickly determine whether an alert represents a real threat.

Where SIEM Fits in the Security Stack

SIEM doesn't operate in isolation. Understanding adjacent technologies clarifies what SIEM should and shouldn't do.

SOAR (Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response) automates response actions. SIEM detects; SOAR responds. Many modern SIEM platforms include native SOAR capabilities, but dedicated SOAR platforms offer deeper automation for complex workflows.

XDR (Extended Detection and Response) provides detection and response across endpoints, network, and cloud from a single vendor's telemetry. XDR platforms typically offer tighter integration and faster deployment than SIEM but are constrained to their vendor's ecosystem. The trend toward "SIEM + XDR" convergence means most enterprise deployments use both.

Security Data Lakes store raw security telemetry at lower cost than SIEM hot storage. Organizations increasingly use data lakes (Snowflake, Databricks, Amazon Security Lake) for long-term retention and compliance while keeping recent data in SIEM for active detection.

The SIEM Market in 2025

The SIEM market reached approximately $6.4 billion in 2024 and continues growing at 14-16% annually. Several trends are reshaping the competitive landscape.

Cloud-native platforms have matured. Microsoft Sentinel, Google Chronicle, and newer entrants like CrowdStrike Falcon LogScale deliver SIEM capabilities without on-premises infrastructure. These platforms often include consumption-based pricing, native cloud integrations, and elastic scalability that legacy platforms struggle to match.

Major consolidation has occurred. Cisco acquired Splunk in 2024, creating questions about Splunk's independent roadmap. LogRhythm and Exabeam merged in 2024, combining their SIEM and UEBA capabilities. Palo Alto Networks continues building out Cortex XSIAM as a SIEM alternative. These shifts affect long-term platform viability considerations.

XDR convergence continues. Most enterprise SIEM vendors now offer or integrate with XDR capabilities. Microsoft Sentinel + Defender XDR, CrowdStrike Falcon LogScale + Falcon XDR, and Palo Alto Cortex XSIAM represent different approaches to combining broad log analysis with deep endpoint/network telemetry.

AI capabilities are differentiating. Every vendor claims AI, but implementation depth varies dramatically. Newer entrants leverage LLMs for natural language querying and automated investigation summaries. Established vendors are retrofitting AI onto architectures designed before modern ML approaches.

Platform Comparison

Microsoft Sentinel

Microsoft Sentinel dominates cloud-native SIEM, particularly for organizations already invested in Microsoft 365 and Azure. Native integrations with Entra ID (formerly Azure AD), Defender XDR, and Azure services provide depth that third-party platforms require significant configuration to match.

Strengths: Deep Microsoft ecosystem integration, consumption-based pricing with free data ingestion for Microsoft sources, mature KQL query language, built-in SOAR through Logic Apps, strong compliance certifications.

Considerations: Costs can escalate unpredictably with data volume, query performance on large datasets requires optimization, non-Microsoft integrations require more effort, vendor lock-in concerns for multi-cloud environments.

Pricing model: Consumption-based on data ingestion (starting ~$2.46/GB) with commitment tiers offering discounts. Microsoft 365 and Azure security logs are free to ingest, significantly reducing TCO for Microsoft-centric environments.

Query example for detecting brute force authentication attempts:

SigninLogs
| where ResultType == "50126"  // Invalid username or password
| summarize
    FailedAttempts = count(),
    DistinctUsers = dcount(UserPrincipalName),
    Users = make_set(UserPrincipalName, 10)
    by IPAddress, bin(TimeGenerated, 15m)
| where FailedAttempts > 20
| project TimeGenerated, IPAddress, FailedAttempts, DistinctUsers, Users

Splunk Enterprise Security

Splunk remains the most flexible SIEM platform for complex, heterogeneous environments. Its Search Processing Language (SPL) offers capabilities no other query language matches, and its integration ecosystem spans virtually every security tool.

Strengths: Most powerful query language, largest integration ecosystem, mature security content library, strong for compliance use cases, extensive training and certification programs.

Considerations: Highest total cost of ownership among major platforms, complex pricing model, significant expertise required for effective deployment, on-premises deployments require substantial infrastructure.

Pricing model: Volume-based licensing with workload, ingest, and entity pricing options. Enterprise Security is an additional licensed app. Splunk Cloud offers consumption-based pricing. Expect $100K+ annually for mid-size deployments, $1M+ for large enterprises.

Query example for detecting suspicious PowerShell execution:

index=wineventlog sourcetype=XmlWinEventLog:Microsoft-Windows-PowerShell/Operational EventCode=4104
| rex field=ScriptBlockText "(?i)(?P<suspicious_keyword>Invoke-Mimikatz|Invoke-Expression|IEX|downloadstring|Net\.WebClient|FromBase64String)"
| where isnotnull(suspicious_keyword)
| stats count values(ScriptBlockText) as Commands by Computer, UserID, suspicious_keyword
| where count > 0

Google Chronicle

Chronicle Security Operations combines SIEM with SOAR capabilities in a platform built on Google's infrastructure. Its petabyte-scale architecture and flat-rate pricing model differentiate it from consumption-based competitors.

Strengths: Unlimited data ingestion at flat rate (security analytics tier), 12-month hot data retention standard, sub-second search across petabytes, native integration with Google Cloud, strong threat intelligence via Mandiant/VirusTotal.

Considerations: Smaller integration ecosystem than Splunk, detection rule language (YARA-L) has a learning curve, less mature than established competitors, limited on-premises options.

Pricing model: Flat annual fee based on organization size and features, not data volume. This predictability is attractive for organizations with large or unpredictable log volumes.

Query example using YARA-L for detecting credential access patterns:

rule credential_access_lsass {
  meta:
    author = "Security Team"
    severity = "HIGH"
    mitre_attack = "T1003.001"

  events:
    $process.metadata.event_type = "PROCESS_LAUNCH"
    $process.target.process.file.full_path = /.*lsass\.exe/ nocase
    $process.principal.process.file.full_path != /.*csrss\.exe/ nocase
    $process.principal.process.file.full_path != /.*wininit\.exe/ nocase

  condition:
    $process
}

CrowdStrike Falcon LogScale

Falcon LogScale (formerly Humio) offers high-speed log management and SIEM capabilities with a unique index-free architecture enabling real-time search at scale. Tight integration with CrowdStrike's Falcon XDR platform creates a compelling combination for existing CrowdStrike customers.

Strengths: Exceptional query speed without pre-indexing, real-time streaming analytics, competitive pricing for high-volume environments, strong integration with Falcon endpoint telemetry.

Considerations: Younger SIEM product compared to established players, smaller detection content library, strongest value proposition requires Falcon XDR investment.

Pricing model: Consumption-based on data volume with options for self-hosted or cloud deployment. Generally more cost-effective than Splunk for equivalent data volumes.

Elastic Security

Elastic Security provides SIEM, endpoint security, and cloud security in an open platform built on Elasticsearch. Organizations can deploy the open-source stack for free or use Elastic Cloud for managed deployment.

Strengths: Open-source foundation with commercial options, strong for custom use cases, integrated endpoint security, no vendor lock-in on data, active community developing detection rules.

Considerations: Requires significant expertise to deploy and tune effectively, commercial features (ML, case management) require paid tiers, scaling Elasticsearch clusters demands operational investment.

Pricing model: Open-source self-managed is free. Elastic Cloud pricing based on deployment size and features. On-premises licensing based on resource units.

Query example using Elastic Query DSL:

{
  "query": {
    "bool": {
      "must": [
        {"match": {"event.code": "4688"}},
        {"wildcard": {"process.command_line": "*-enc*"}}
      ],
      "filter": [
        {"range": {"@timestamp": {"gte": "now-1h"}}}
      ]
    }
  },
  "aggs": {
    "by_host": {
      "terms": {"field": "host.name"},
      "aggs": {
        "commands": {
          "terms": {"field": "process.command_line.keyword", "size": 5}
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

IBM Security QRadar Suite

QRadar has been a SIEM leader for over a decade, known for strong correlation capabilities and compliance features. IBM has repositioned QRadar as a suite including SIEM, SOAR, EDR, and XDR capabilities with cloud-native deployment options.

Strengths: Mature correlation engine, strong compliance and regulatory capabilities, integrated vulnerability management, established in regulated industries (finance, healthcare, government).

Considerations: Complex licensing model, modernization efforts ongoing, cloud-native version still maturing, interface feels dated compared to newer platforms.

Pricing model: Perpetual and subscription licensing based on events per second (EPS) and flows per minute (FPM). Cloud deployment available through IBM Cloud Pak for Security.

Open Source: Wazuh

Wazuh provides open-source SIEM, XDR, and compliance capabilities that represent a credible option for organizations with limited budgets and strong technical teams. Built on OpenSearch (Elasticsearch fork), it offers file integrity monitoring, vulnerability detection, and regulatory compliance out of the box.

Strengths: Completely free and open source, active development community, strong compliance focus (PCI DSS, HIPAA, GDPR), integrated endpoint agent, no licensing costs.

Considerations: Requires significant expertise to deploy and maintain, limited commercial support options, scaling requires careful architecture planning, fewer pre-built integrations than commercial platforms.

Deploy Wazuh stack:

# Install Wazuh indexer, server, and dashboard
curl -sO https://packages.wazuh.com/4.7/wazuh-install.sh
bash wazuh-install.sh -a

# Check cluster status
/usr/share/wazuh-indexer/bin/opensearch-plugin list

# Register an agent (on endpoint)
curl -sO https://packages.wazuh.com/4.7/wazuh-agent-4.7.0-1.x86_64.rpm
rpm -ivh wazuh-agent-4.7.0-1.x86_64.rpm
sed -i "s/MANAGER_IP/wazuh.server.ip/" /var/ossec/etc/ossec.conf
systemctl enable wazuh-agent && systemctl start wazuh-agent

Practical Implementation

Log Forwarding Configuration

Getting logs into your SIEM requires configuring sources to forward events. Here are common patterns:

Linux syslog forwarding with rsyslog:

# /etc/rsyslog.d/50-siem.conf
# Forward all logs to SIEM collector
*.* @@siem.company.com:514

# Forward only auth logs
auth,authpriv.* @@siem.company.com:514

# Test configuration
rsyslogd -N1
systemctl restart rsyslog

Windows Event Forwarding to Sentinel:

# Enable Windows Remote Management
winrm quickconfig -q

# Configure event subscription (on collector)
wecutil qc /q

# Create subscription for security events
$subscription = @"
<Subscription xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/2006/03/windows/events/subscription">
    <SubscriptionId>SecurityEvents</SubscriptionId>
    <SubscriptionType>SourceInitiated</SubscriptionType>
    <Enabled>true</Enabled>
    <Uri>http://schemas.microsoft.com/wbem/wsman/1/windows/EventLog</Uri>
    <Query>
        <![CDATA[
            <QueryList>
                <Query Path="Security">
                    <Select>*[System[(EventID=4624 or EventID=4625 or EventID=4688)]]</Select>
                </Query>
            </QueryList>
        ]]>
    </Query>
</Subscription>
"@

Fluent Bit for container log collection:

# fluent-bit.conf
[SERVICE]
    Flush         5
    Log_Level     info
    Parsers_File  parsers.conf

[INPUT]
    Name              tail
    Path              /var/log/containers/*.log
    Parser            docker
    Tag               kube.*
    Refresh_Interval  10
    Mem_Buf_Limit     50MB

[FILTER]
    Name                kubernetes
    Match               kube.*
    Kube_URL            https://kubernetes.default.svc:443
    Kube_Tag_Prefix     kube.var.log.containers.
    Merge_Log           On

[OUTPUT]
    Name            splunk
    Match           *
    Host            splunk-hec.company.com
    Port            8088
    TLS             On
    Splunk_Token    ${SPLUNK_HEC_TOKEN}

Detection Rule Development

Effective SIEM detection requires well-crafted rules. SIGMA provides a vendor-agnostic format that converts to platform-specific syntax.

SIGMA rule for suspicious service installation:

title: Suspicious Service Installation
id: 7fe71fc9-de3b-432a-8f57-c0ca7c2b8d23
status: stable
description: Detects service installations that may indicate persistence
author: Security Team
date: 2025/01/01
logsource:
    product: windows
    service: system
detection:
    selection:
        Provider_Name: 'Service Control Manager'
        EventID: 7045
    filter_known:
        ServiceName|contains:
            - 'Windows'
            - 'Microsoft'
            - 'Dell'
            - 'HP'
    filter_paths:
        ImagePath|contains:
            - 'C:\Windows\'
            - 'C:\Program Files\'
            - 'C:\Program Files (x86)\'
    condition: selection and not filter_known and not filter_paths
falsepositives:
    - Legitimate software installation
level: medium
tags:
    - attack.persistence
    - attack.t1543.003

Convert SIGMA to platform-specific format:

# Install SIGMA tools
pip install sigmatools

# Convert to Splunk SPL
sigma convert -t splunk -p sysmon rules/suspicious_service.yml

# Convert to Microsoft Sentinel KQL
sigma convert -t microsoft365defender rules/suspicious_service.yml

# Convert to Elastic Query DSL
sigma convert -t elasticsearch rules/suspicious_service.yml

Common Detection Use Cases

Impossible travel detection (KQL for Sentinel):

let timeWindow = 1h;
let speedThreshold = 500; // km/h - faster than commercial flight

SigninLogs
| where TimeGenerated > ago(24h)
| where ResultType == 0 // Successful sign-in
| extend Location = strcat(LocationDetails.city, ", ", LocationDetails.countryOrRegion)
| extend Latitude = toreal(LocationDetails.geoCoordinates.latitude)
| extend L
| order by UserPrincipalName, TimeGenerated asc
| extend PrevLatitude = prev(Latitude, 1)
| extend PrevL 1)
| extend PrevTime = prev(TimeGenerated, 1)
| extend PrevUser = prev(UserPrincipalName, 1)
| where UserPrincipalName == PrevUser
| extend TimeDiffHours = datetime_diff('hour', TimeGenerated, PrevTime)
| where TimeDiffHours > 0 and TimeDiffHours < 24
| extend Distance = geo_distance_2points(Longitude, Latitude, PrevLongitude, PrevLatitude) / 1000
| extend Speed = Distance / TimeDiffHours
| where Speed > speedThreshold
| project TimeGenerated, UserPrincipalName, Location, Speed, Distance, TimeDiffHours

Data exfiltration via DNS (SPL for Splunk):

index=dns sourcetype=stream:dns
| eval subdomain_length = len(mvindex(split(query, "."), 0))
| eval query_entropy = entropy(query)
| where subdomain_length > 50 OR query_entropy > 4
| stats count dc(query) as unique_queries sum(subdomain_length) as total_length by src_ip
| where count > 100 AND unique_queries > 50
| sort - total_length

Selection Criteria

By Organization Size

Small organizations (< 500 employees):

Consider Microsoft Sentinel if Microsoft 365 is primary productivity suite
Evaluate Wazuh for budget-conscious deployments with technical staff
Avoid Splunk unless specific use case demands it—TCO is prohibitive

Mid-market (500-5,000 employees):

Microsoft Sentinel or Google Chronicle offer predictable pricing
Elastic Security provides flexibility without extreme licensing costs
Consider managed SIEM/MDR if security team is small

Enterprise (5,000+ employees):

Splunk remains viable if budget and expertise exist
Evaluate multi-SIEM strategies (cloud-native + on-prem for specific requirements)
Consider security data lake architecture for cost optimization

By Cloud Provider

Microsoft Azure-centric:

Microsoft Sentinel is the obvious choice. Free ingestion for Azure and M365 logs, native Defender XDR integration, and Azure-native deployment make alternatives hard to justify.

Google Cloud-centric:

Chronicle Security Operations provides similar advantages for GCP—native integrations, Google infrastructure backing, and unified security operations with Mandiant threat intelligence.

AWS-centric:

No dominant choice. Amazon Security Lake provides log aggregation but not detection. Consider Splunk Cloud (AWS partnership), Elastic Security, or CrowdStrike depending on existing tooling.

Multi-cloud:

Avoid single-cloud SIEM lock-in. Splunk, Elastic, or CrowdStrike Falcon LogScale offer better multi-cloud parity than Microsoft or Google cloud-native offerings.

By Existing Security Stack

CrowdStrike Falcon customers: Falcon LogScale integration provides unified endpoint + log analytics.

Palo Alto Networks customers: Evaluate Cortex XSIAM as SIEM alternative—tight integration with Palo Alto security stack.

Microsoft Defender customers: Sentinel + Defender XDR integration is difficult to replicate with third-party SIEM.

Measuring SIEM Effectiveness

Deploying a SIEM without measuring outcomes produces expensive log storage. Track these metrics from day one:

Metric                          Target          Measures
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Mean Time to Detect (MTTD)      < 1 hour        Alert generation after event occurrence
Mean Time to Investigate        < 30 min        Alert to analyst determination
Detection Coverage              > 80%           MITRE ATT&CK techniques with active rules
False Positive Rate             < 30%           Alerts closed as benign / total alerts
Log Source Coverage             > 90%           Critical assets with logs in SIEM
Data Freshness                  < 5 min         Event timestamp to SIEM availability
Query Performance               < 30 sec        95th percentile search response time

Query your SIEM to track these metrics:

// Microsoft Sentinel - Alert investigation time
SecurityIncident
| where TimeGenerated > ago(30d)
| extend Investigati ClosedTime, CreatedTime)
| summarize
    AvgInvestigati
    MedianInvestigati 50),
    P95Investigati 95)
    by Classification

Getting Started

If you're evaluating SIEM platforms or modernizing an existing deployment:

Week 1-2: Requirements Definition

Document your log sources, retention requirements, compliance obligations, and integration needs. Identify your top 10 detection use cases. Calculate expected data volumes—this drives pricing for most platforms.

Week 3-4: Platform Evaluation

Request trials from 2-3 candidates. Deploy agents or configure forwarding for a subset of production logs. Test query performance, detection capabilities, and analyst workflows against your actual data.

Week 5-6: POC Validation

Build detection rules for your priority use cases. Measure false positive rates. Evaluate analyst experience for investigation workflows. Compare actual costs against estimates.

Week 7-8: Decision and Planning

Select platform based on POC results. Develop deployment roadmap covering log source onboarding, detection rule development, analyst training, and integration with existing tools.

The SIEM market offers more capable platforms at lower price points than ever before. Cloud-native options eliminate infrastructure complexity that made SIEM deployments notoriously difficult. The organizations that invest in modern detection capabilities now will identify breaches in hours instead of months. Those that don't will continue discovering compromises only after the damage is done.

---