We performed a comparison between Grafana Loki and Logsign Next-Gen SIEM 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."The most valuable feature of the solution is the tool's GUI. The solution's GUI is very user-friendly."
"The effectiveness of filters is pivotal for optimizing the search process and extracting the specific information we need from the extensive log data."
"I appreciate the capability to process logs from microservices and seamlessly integrate them into Grafana."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to set up alerts, which becomes necessary when we need to receive notifications for specific events."
"The most valuable feature of Grafana Loki is the dashboards which are really simple to create."
"The best feature of Grafana Loki is that it integrates well with our other tool."
"We are using Grafana Loki as a database for real-time metrics."
"The tool can be used in multi-cluster environments."
"Logsign provides sample logs within the product, allowing users to see how logs will appear before integration, which is a valuable feature for testing and understanding log formats."
"The most valuable features of Logsign SIEM are its cloud capabilities, alerting functionality, integration with Elastic Search, and configuration options."
"There is a need for some change in the alerting types of the product. In short, a few changes in the alert area are needed due to minor shortcomings."
"We had a well-structured dashboard with a functional query. However, an issue arose when the Kubernetes pod restarted. The statistics from our Grafana query would reset, dropping to zero and starting anew. This was particularly noticeable with linear graphs, which are expected to show consistent growth."
"The solution's scalability depends on the team managing the Grafana instance."
"My main concern is the recommended production-grade setup. They suggest using tools like Tanka or Jsonnet. They should simplify the process to increase adoption."
"We encountered certain limitations when it came to alerting, particularly when dealing with specific data sources."
"In Grafana Loki, the creation of metrics is not so easy, making it an area that could be made easier."
"The solution has shortcomings regarding security monitoring-oriented features that need improvement."
"The product must improve its UI."
"I hope they address the pricing model for Logsign Next-Gen SIEM, especially regarding regional variations. The pricing should not differ based on the country of operation as it can lead to dissatisfaction among customers. A fixed pricing structure would be more favorable for us. I would also suggest enhancing the GUI interface and adding features similar to xFi Exchange from IBM Pure. This would streamline operations and save time for analysts."
"Improvements needed in Logsign SIEM are providing specific security alerts that can be filtered and configured more effectively."
Grafana Loki is ranked 13th in Log Management with 12 reviews while Logsign Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 43rd in Log Management with 3 reviews. Grafana Loki is rated 8.0, while Logsign Next-Gen SIEM is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Grafana Loki writes "Effective for Logging, recovery from node failures is fast and single UI supports metrics, logs, and even tracing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Logsign Next-Gen SIEM writes "Easy to use and find the features that you need". Grafana Loki is most compared with Graylog, Wazuh, syslog-ng, Splunk Enterprise Security and Better Stack, whereas Logsign Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with Wazuh, IBM Security QRadar, Logpoint and ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer. See our Grafana Loki vs. Logsign Next-Gen SIEM 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.