We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and Grafana based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users prefer Grafana over Azure Monitor as it offers highly customizable and visually appealing graphs, flexibility in integration with other tools, and is open-source. Although Grafana's customer service and support have mixed reviews, its ease of setup and moderate pricing make it a popular choice for data visualization and analytics.
"Provides an overview and high-level information."
"The most valuable feature is the universality of their functionalities in all Azure services, including, software solutions."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the alert system, which can be set according to our metrics. The integration is smooth."
"I use the solution to monitor the infrastructure and applications."
"A product that is well-integrated for monitoring Microsoft Azure."
"Azure Monitor's best features are its graphs and charts, the different visibility options, and reporting."
"The solution works well overall. It's easy to implement and simple to use."
"Among the valuable features of this solution, Application Insights stands out as one of the most significant. It provides insights into application performance and helps identify issues and bottlenecks."
"It is easy to change and move virtual servers."
"Provides good dashboard visualization."
"The product's initial setup phase was very easy."
"The integration between Loki and Tempo is valuable."
"The solution has good features."
"Plugin: Connecting Grafana to multiple APIs of leading monitoring tools and alerting tools."
"The most valuable thing was that it had a good visualization tool."
"Kubernetes could help us to better visualize the trend of our data by recording and displaying our history over a chosen duration, such as the last 30 days."
"The monitoring of Kubernetes clusters needs improvement to be on par with competitors."
"Azure Monitor's integration with applications could be improved."
"If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill."
"In terms of pricing, Azure Monitor's billing based on data size can sometimes lead to increased costs, especially when developers need to purge data frequently. While there are mechanisms in place to track and manage this, there is room for improvement in terms of optimizing data pausing and related processes. Enhancements in this area could help mitigate potential billing concerns and provide a more seamless experience for users."
"The process of implementation needs to be easier."
"The scalability could be improved as there are some limitations."
"There are a lot of things that take more time to do, such as charting, alerting, and correlation of data, and things like that. Azure Monitor doesn't tell you why something happened. It just tells you that it happened. It should also have some type of AI. Environments and applications are becoming more and more complex every day with hundreds or thousands of microservices. Therefore, having to do a lot of the stuff manually takes a lot of time, and on top of that, troubleshooting issues takes a lot of time. The traditional method of troubleshooting doesn't really work for or apply to this environment we're in. So, having an AI-based system and the ability to automate deployments of your monitoring and configurations makes it much easier."
"The solution should have cross-connection or cross-communication between tech partners."
"The look and feel of the charting and graph capabilities in Grafana could improve. If they provided a storyboard type of feature as they have in other solutions, such as PowerBI. The multi-tenanted and stitch metrics features could improve."
"I have a problem with Grafana in the area of documentation."
"Lacks event management which affects our DevOps people."
"Lacks in-depth graphs and sufficient AI."
"Grafana need to improve the logging functionality."
"The security needs to be improved, such as the capacity to add permissions on dashboards."
"More dashboard is required, out-of-the-box, for OpenNMS."
"I had issues with the solution's configuration part."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while Grafana is ranked 6th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 39 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while Grafana is rated 8.0. 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 Grafana writes "Agent-free with great dashboards and an active community". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and New Relic, whereas Grafana is most compared with New Relic, Sentry, Dynatrace, Elastic Observability and Honeycomb.io. See our Azure Monitor vs. Grafana report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.