We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and Elastic Observability based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure Monitor has better integration with Microsoft technologies, more out-of-the-box functionalities, lower cost, and better customer support. Elastic Observability is noted for its machine learning and custom development capabilities, but has a steep learning curve, lacks comprehensive visualization and metrics, and could improve pricing. Overall, Azure Monitor is seen as a more robust and stable product that offers a centralized location for resource monitoring.
"It's a Microsoft native tool, so it works well with other Microsoft technologies, which is predominantly what our customer end-user base is."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to focus on delivery and maximizing the performance of applications and services."
"Good load and metrics gathering and very good analysis."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs."
"I am impressed by the reporting on the average eight ports that we get from this solution."
"Azure Monitor gives us the observability to check everything that we have in the cloud."
"The most valuable feature is that it's stable. It hasn't crossed any thresholds."
"Good design and easy to use once implemented."
"It is a powerful tool that allows users to collect and transform logs as needed, enabling flexible visualization and analysis."
"Its diverse set of features available on the cloud is of significant importance."
"Elastic APM has plenty of features, such as the Elastic server for Kibana and many additional plugins. It's a comprehensive tool when used as a logging platform."
"The tool's most valuable feature is centralized logging. Elastic Common Search helps us to search for the logs across the organization."
"For full stack observability, Elastic is the best tool compared with any other tool ."
"We use AppDynamics and Elastic. The reason why we're using Elastic APM is because of the license count. It's very favorable compared to AppDynamics. It's inexpensive; it's economical."
"The ability to ensure that the data is searchable and maintainable is highly valuable for our purposes."
"We cannot use AI services with the solution."
"The monitoring of Kubernetes clusters needs improvement to be on par with competitors."
"The biggest one is probably just the user interface. There could be more advanced logging at the database level. They can also improve their query builder to allow you to search for things better, but I last used it about a year ago. They might have already changed a ton of things in the newer versions."
"The troubleshooting logs need improvement. There should be some improvement there. I have a hard time finding the right logs at the right times whenever there is an issue occurring."
"The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics."
"They should include advanced logging on the database level in the Azure pool."
"Enhancing and reaching a level of detail that facilitates pinpointing and addressing issues at such a refined level within the application and database components would be helpful."
"n comparison to New Relic, which I've used before, it's a bit more complicated. It's not as easy to use. It also took some time to get it working. The implementation needs to be simpler."
"Improving code insight related to infrastructure and network, particularly focusing on aspects such as firewalls, switches, routers, and testing would be beneficial."
"Elastic Observability’s price could be improved."
"In the future, Elastic APM needs a portfolio iTool. They can provide an easy way to develop the custom UI for Kibana."
"There could be more low-code features included in the product."
"They need more skills in the market. There are not enough skills in the market. It is not pervasive enough on the market, in my opinion. In other words, there isn't a big enough user base."
"The cost must be made more transparent."
"The tool's scalability involves a more complex implementation process. It requires careful calculations to determine the number of nodes needed, the specifications of each node, and the configuration of hot, warm, and cold zones for data storage. Additionally, managing log retention policies adds further complexity. The solution's pricing also needs to be cheaper."
"Elastic Observability needs to have better standardization, logging, and schema."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while Elastic Observability is ranked 7th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 22 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while Elastic Observability is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Elastic Observability writes "The user interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. ". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and AWS X-Ray, whereas Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, AppDynamics, Sentry and Datadog. See our Azure Monitor vs. Elastic Observability report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.