We performed a comparison between Elastic Observability and Fortinet FortiAnalyzer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Machine learning is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The ability to ensure that the data is searchable and maintainable is highly valuable for our purposes."
"It is a powerful tool that allows users to collect and transform logs as needed, enabling flexible visualization and analysis."
"Good design and easy to use once implemented."
"It has always been a stable solution."
"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."
"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 solution has been stable in our usage."
"Log collection is the most valuable. The UI looks great. It has a very good look and feel. We don't have the need to use solid state drives. We use mechanic drives, and we don't see any performance issues, so basically, it is doing fine."
"Report generation is very easy"
"Separating sections or conditions on Fortinet FortiAnalyzer is quite clear."
"Many of my clients are financial institutions that transmit files from around the country across a VPN. In a setup like this, it's helpful to have a centralized dashboard to manage firewalls and other security solutions across a distributed environment. You can do all sorts of analysis and configure it to trigger alarms."
"Storage in SSD helps in generating customized reports."
"FortiAnalyzer's best feature is centralized log analysis. It's based on SQL database, so I can fully customize my report, chart-wise and log-wise, and can create as many reports as I want without any limit."
"From my perspective, we need to see the traffic in a good way so we can know what has happened in our network. The analyzing tools and the monitoring tools and the logs are the important part in the network."
"The product works well with other products."
"The price is the only issue in the solution. It can be made better and cheaper."
"There's a steep learning curve if you've never used this solution before."
"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."
"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."
"Elastic Observability is difficult to use. There are only three options for customization but this can be difficult for our use case. We do not have other options to choose the metrics shown, such as CPU or memory usage."
"More web features could be added to the product."
"The cost must be made more transparent."
"Elastic Observability needs to have better standardization, logging, and schema."
"I would like to see an improvement in the technical support. Stronger authentication will also be a plus."
"The user interface could be a bit more user-friendly."
"One of the main disadvantages is not having a direct link to the security policy when you see something in the log."
"It will be better if behavior or indicators of compromise were on the same licensing schema. Currently, it is an advanced feature that you have to purchase as an add-on. This is the reason we're trying to do the ELK so that we can integrate them and create those rules by using open-source software. It will also be better if it has some more integration with IT service management tools so that we can do endpoint protection and response based on those indicators of compromise or those behavior analysis rules that create events that can automatically flow. We can inject that data into a service incident ticket on our IT service management tool, and that way we can assign the ticket to the proper teams and respond right away. Currently, we only have integration with ServiceNow."
"The deployment of Fortinet FortiAnalyzer is not complex, but integrating it with firewalls can take some time, depending on the number of firewalls."
"Fortinet FortiAnalyzer needs to improve its pricing flexibility."
"FortiAnalyzer's price could be lower."
"Automated reports focusing on compliance issues would provide a clearer understanding of potential gaps and the need for remediation."
Elastic Observability is ranked 14th in Log Management with 22 reviews while Fortinet FortiAnalyzer is ranked 8th in Log Management with 85 reviews. Elastic Observability is rated 7.8, while Fortinet FortiAnalyzer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Elastic Observability writes "The user interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiAnalyzer writes "We can automate event-based handling solutions, is stable, and is great for heavy traffic". Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, AppDynamics, Azure Monitor and Sentry, whereas Fortinet FortiAnalyzer is most compared with Wazuh, Splunk Enterprise Security, Graylog, Grafana Loki and LogRhythm SIEM. See our Elastic Observability vs. Fortinet FortiAnalyzer report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Log Management 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.