We performed a comparison between Elastic Observability and ScienceLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool's most valuable feature is centralized logging. Elastic Common Search helps us to search for the logs across the organization."
"The solution is open-source and helps with back-end logging. It is also easy to handle."
"The solution has been stable in our usage."
"It has always been a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of Elastic Observability is the text search."
"The architecture and system's stability are simple."
"Elastic Observability significantly improves incident response time by providing quick access to logs and data across various sources. For instance, searching for specific keywords in logs spanning over a month from multiple data sources can be completed within seconds."
"It is a powerful tool that allows users to collect and transform logs as needed, enabling flexible visualization and analysis."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"Power packs."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"The best feature is the highly flexible graphs."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing. There is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"There is room for improvement regarding its APM capabilities."
"Elastic Observability is reactive rather than proactive. It should act as an ITSM tool and be able to create tickets and alerts on Jira."
"The solution needs to use more AI. Once the product onboards AI, users would more effectively be able to track endpoints for specific messages."
"Elastic Observability needs to have better standardization, logging, and schema."
"There's a steep learning curve if you've never used this solution before."
"The interface could be improved."
"Elastic APM's visualization is not that great compared to other tools. It's number of metrics is very low."
"The price is the only issue in the solution. It can be made better and cheaper."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
Elastic Observability is ranked 10th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 42 reviews. Elastic Observability is rated 7.8, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. 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 ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, Azure Monitor, Sentry and AppDynamics, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our Elastic Observability vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.