Back to blog
Security
IntermediateForSecurity EngineersPlatform EngineersEngineering Managers
9 min

Wazuh vs Microsoft Sentinel vs Google SecOps: The SIEM You Pick Is the Bill You Get

Three SIEMs, three completely different meters: Sentinel bills the gigabytes you ingest, Google SecOps bills packages with detection-rule limits and will not publish a price, Wazuh bills agents or nothing at all. The model you choose quietly decides what your team is willing to log — and therefore what you can investigate.

siemwazuhmicrosoft-sentinelgoogle-secopssiem-pricingcloud-native-siem
Cover image: Wazuh vs Microsoft Sentinel vs Google SecOps: The SIEM You Pick Is the Bill You Get
Contents

Most SIEM comparisons are feature tables. They are also useless, because the features converge and the pricing models do not.

Wazuh, Microsoft Sentinel and Google SecOps all ingest logs, all detect threats, all sit at the centre of a security operations workflow. What separates them is what each one counts — and that choice quietly determines what your team is willing to log, which determines what you can investigate at 3am.

Here are the three meters, from vendor documentation checked in August 2026.

Sentinel Counts Your Gigabytes

Microsoft Sentinel bills on the volume of data ingested, priced by the tier the data lands in.

The analytics tier has two modes:

  • Pay-as-you-go — the default, based on data volume stored. Note that Microsoft measures a GB as 10⁹ bytes here; unlike S3, these are decimal gigabytes.
  • Commitment tiers — pre-purchased capacity starting at 100 GB per day, at a discounted effective rate. Usage beyond your commitment is billed at that same effective rate rather than at pay-as-you-go.

Retention of the first 90 days is included. Beyond that you pay Log Analytics retention prices.

One caveat about the numbers in this article: Microsoft keeps the actual per-GB rates on its pricing page and cost estimator rather than in the billing documentation, and they vary by region and commitment tier. What is documented — and what actually shapes your architecture — is the structure below. Run your own volume through the Sentinel cost estimator for the rate that applies to you.

There is now also a data lake tier, which meters four things separately: ingestion, data processing, storage and query. The storage figure is calculated on a fixed 6:1 compression ratio — retain 600 GB of raw data and you are billed for 100 GB. Queries, however, are charged per GB of uncompressed data scanned. Those two facts sit next to each other in the docs and are easy to conflate when estimating.

A genuinely useful set of sources is free: Azure Activity logs, Sentinel Health, Office 365 audit logs covering SharePoint, Exchange and Teams, and security alerts from the Defender family. The caveat is sharp — the alerts are free, the raw logs behind several of those products are not.

The trap in commitment tiers

You can raise a commitment tier at any time. You can lower it only once every 31 days.

That asymmetry is worth planning around. Commit at a level your log volume does not sustain — because a noisy source got switched off, or a migration finished — and you are locked into paying for that capacity for the rest of the month.

One date to put in the calendar

After 31 March 2027, Microsoft Sentinel will no longer be supported in the Azure portal and will be available only in the Microsoft Defender portal. If your runbooks, training material or automation reference Azure portal paths, that is a dated migration task, not an optional one.

Three SIEM pricing meters compared: Microsoft Sentinel billing gigabytes ingested per day, Google SecOps selling packages capped by detection rule counts, and Wazuh billing agent counts or nothing at all when self-hosted
Same job, three different meters. What each vendor counts is what your architecture will optimise against.

Google SecOps Counts Your Detection Rules

Google publishes three packages and no prices at all. Every tier says “contact sales for pricing.”

What is public is the shape of the limits, and it is unusual: the ceilings are expressed in detection rules, not gigabytes.

Google SecOps Counts Your Detection Rules
Standard Enterprise Enterprise Plus
Single-event rules 1,000 2,000 3,500
Multi-event rules 75 125 200
Environments 1 Unlimited Unlimited
Hot retention 12 months 12 months 12 months
UEBA Yes Yes
Gemini in SecOps Yes Yes
Applied Threat Intelligence Mandiant, VirusTotal, Google

All three include 12 months of hot data retention, 700+ parsers and 300+ SOAR integrations. Enterprise Plus adds advanced data pipeline management, 12 months of routing to another destination to support SIEM migrations, and free BigQuery storage for UDM exports.

Two observations, one favourable and one not.

In Google’s favour: twelve months of hot retention as standard is a different posture from 90 days included and pay-per-month afterwards. If your compliance regime or your incident timelines assume a year of searchable data, that is a meaningful structural difference rather than a discount.

Against: you cannot model a budget without a sales call. For a platform team trying to compare three options in a spreadsheet, “contact sales” is itself a cost — it is weeks of procurement before you know whether the option was ever viable.

Wazuh Counts Your Agents, or Nothing

Wazuh is the open-source entry, and its pricing splits cleanly in two.

Self-hosted carries no licence fee. That is genuinely free in the sense that the software costs nothing, and genuinely not free in the sense that you now run an indexer cluster whose storage grows with every log source you onboard — plus upgrades, plus capacity planning, plus the engineer who understands it.

Wazuh Cloud starts at $571 per month for the Small tier: up to 100 active agents, one month of indexed data retention and three months of archive retention, with standard support. Larger tiers scale up from there. The platform is PCI DSS and SOC 2 certified, with a 14-day free trial.

Look closely at that meter, because it is the important part: Wazuh Cloud counts active agents and retention windows, not gigabytes ingested. A chatty endpoint costs the same as a quiet one.

That inverts the incentive completely. Under Sentinel, a verbose audit policy on one server increases your bill. Under Wazuh Cloud, it does not.

The Comparison That Matters

How each SIEM pricing model changes team behaviour: volume pricing pushes teams to filter logs, agent pricing pushes them to limit endpoint coverage, rule-count limits push them to consolidate detections, and self-hosting pushes cost into engineering time
Every meter creates a behaviour. The question is whether that behaviour is one you can live with during an incident.
The Comparison That Matters
Wazuh Microsoft Sentinel Google SecOps
Meter Agents (cloud) or nothing (self-hosted) GB ingested per day Package tier + rule limits
Entry price $0 self-hosted; $571/mo cloud Pay-as-you-go per GB Not published
Commitment Monthly tiers From 100 GB/day, lower once per 31 days Annual, via sales
Included retention 1 month indexed, 3 months archive (Small) 90 days 12 months hot
Detection limits None imposed None imposed 1,000–3,500 rules by tier
You operate Everything (self-hosted) Nothing Nothing
Price transparency Public Public Contact sales

The Part Nobody Puts in the Comparison

A volume meter creates a perverse incentive, and it is worth naming plainly: the better your logging, the higher your bill.

Enable verbose audit logging on a domain controller and the invoice moves. Onboard a noisy but occasionally crucial source — DNS query logs, say, or process creation events — and someone in finance asks why. The rational team response is to filter: drop the debug level, sample the high-volume source, postpone onboarding.

Every one of those decisions is invisible until an incident. Then the missing telemetry turns out to be exactly the thing the investigation needed, and nobody remembers that it was a budget decision made eight months earlier.

This is not an argument that per-GB pricing is illegitimate. It is an argument that the meter is an architectural constraint, and should be treated like one:

  • Route genuinely high-value security telemetry into the expensive analytics tier where detections run.
  • Keep high-volume, low-value data in a cheaper tier you can still search when you need it — Sentinel’s lake tier exists precisely for this, and Google’s Enterprise Plus package includes routing to another destination.
  • Write down which sources you chose not to ingest, and why. That document is what you will want during your first serious incident.

Choosing

Choose Sentinel if you are already a Microsoft security shop. The free data sources — Office 365 audit logs, Defender alerts, Azure Activity — are a real economic advantage that no competitor can match for that estate, and the Defender portal consolidation is where Microsoft is clearly heading.

Choose Google SecOps if retention depth and detection quality matter more than budget predictability. Twelve months of hot data as standard is a genuinely different operating posture, and the Mandiant intelligence in Enterprise Plus is not something you can assemble yourself. Budget the procurement time.

Choose Wazuh if you have the engineering capacity and want the meter off. Self-hosted, no licence cost, no per-GB anxiety, complete control of retention. You are trading a software bill for an operational one — which is a good trade for some teams and a terrible one for teams without a platform function.

And check the meter against your own shape. Few endpoints producing enormous logs? Volume pricing is your enemy. Tens of thousands of quiet endpoints? Agent pricing is. Complex correlation logic? Rule ceilings are the constraint nobody warned you about.

A Short Checklist

  1. Measure your current daily log volume in GB and your endpoint count. You need both numbers, because different vendors bill each one.
  2. List your sources by value, not by volume. The expensive tier is for the valuable ones.
  3. Check which of your sources are free on the platform you are considering — for Microsoft estates on Sentinel this can be a large fraction.
  4. Model retention explicitly: 90 days included is a very different budget from 12 months included.
  5. If you are considering a commitment tier, model the month your volume drops. You can only lower it once every 31 days.
  6. For Google, start the sales conversation early — you cannot evaluate what you cannot price.
  7. Write down the sources you decided not to ingest. Review that list after every incident.

The Real Point

Every SIEM vendor will tell you their platform detects more with less effort. They are competing on the same detections, the same integrations, increasingly the same AI assistants.

Where they genuinely differ is in what they count — and what they count becomes what your team optimises against. A per-gigabyte meter produces an organisation that filters logs. An agent meter produces one that limits endpoint coverage. A rule ceiling produces one that consolidates detections into fewer, broader rules.

Pick the constraint you can live with, then design around it deliberately, instead of discovering it in an invoice.


Related reading: for what goes into a SIEM in the first place, see Falco for production runtime security and build your own CSPM. For the same economics applied to storage, see what egress actually costs.

Sources: all figures come from vendor documentation checked in August 2026 — Microsoft Sentinel billing (updated June 2026), the Google Security Operations product page, and Wazuh Cloud. Prices change; verify before committing a budget.

Frequently asked questions

How is Microsoft Sentinel priced?

By the volume of data ingested, billed according to the tier the data lands in. The analytics tier offers pay-as-you-go, measured in GB where a GB is 10⁹ bytes, or commitment tiers that start at 100 GB per day and give a discounted effective rate. Usage above your commitment is billed at that same effective rate. Retention of the first 90 days is included, and beyond that you pay Log Analytics retention prices. The separate data lake tier bills ingestion, processing, storage and queries individually, with storage calculated at a fixed 6:1 compression ratio — 600 GB of raw data is billed as 100 GB — while queries are charged on uncompressed data scanned. A number of sources are free, including Azure Activity logs, Office 365 audit logs and security alerts from the Defender products, though the raw underlying logs for several of those products are paid.

How much does Google SecOps cost?

Google does not publish prices. The product page lists three packages — Standard, Enterprise and Enterprise Plus — and every one of them says 'contact sales for pricing'. What is public is what the packages contain, and the limits are unusual for a SIEM: they are expressed in detection rules rather than gigabytes. Standard supports up to 1,000 single-event and 75 multi-event rules with one environment; Enterprise raises that to 2,000 and 125 with unlimited environments, UEBA and Gemini; Enterprise Plus reaches 3,500 and 200 and adds Applied Threat Intelligence drawing on Mandiant and VirusTotal. All three packages include 12 months of hot data retention, 700+ parsers and 300+ SOAR integrations.

Is Wazuh really free?

The self-hosted platform is open source and carries no licence fee, so 'free' is accurate in the same way self-hosting anything is free: you pay in servers, storage, upgrades and the engineering time to run an indexer cluster that will grow with your log volume. Wazuh also sells a managed option, Wazuh Cloud, which starts at $571 per month for the Small tier — up to 100 active agents, one month of indexed data retention and three months of archive retention, with standard support. The platform is PCI DSS and SOC 2 certified, and there is a 14-day free trial. Note what the cloud meter is: active agents and retention, not gigabytes ingested.

Which SIEM is cheapest?

The question has no answer without your telemetry profile, because each product meters something different. If you ingest enormous volumes from relatively few endpoints, a per-GB meter like Sentinel's is the expensive one and an agent-based or package-based model looks better. If you have tens of thousands of endpoints producing modest logs each, agent-count pricing is what hurts. If your detection logic is complex, Google's rule-count ceilings matter more than either. The useful exercise is not comparing list prices but working out which meter your own environment runs up fastest — and then checking whether that meter punishes the logging you actually need.

Does SIEM pricing affect security outcomes?

Yes, and this is the part that rarely appears in vendor comparisons. When ingestion is metered per gigabyte, every additional log source has a visible price and every verbose audit setting becomes a budget conversation. Teams respond rationally by filtering — dropping debug logs, sampling, or simply not onboarding a noisy source. That decision is invisible until an incident, when the missing telemetry turns out to be exactly what the investigation needed. The lesson is not that volume pricing is illegitimate but that it should be a deliberate architectural choice: route high-value security telemetry to the expensive analytics tier and keep high-volume, low-value data in cheaper storage that you can still search.

From the community

Discussion on the Fediverse

Replies from Mastodon and Bluesky — straight from the open web, no tracking.

Loading replies …

ENDE