We performed a comparison between ArcSight Logger and Datadog 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 is the search capability, which is simple to use."
"In terms of ArcSight Logger's most valuable feature, it is their scalability. ArcSight's real advantage is its scalability because they have two layers, including the logger layer."
"It's an efficient solution."
"Our return on investment for implementing ArcSight Logger over the past 12 months has been positive."
"The machine learning is a good feature."
"The log digestion features from threat intelligence platforms like Recorded Future or Talos are valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the level of detail that you can see about certain events, even when they do not come up in the console."
"The technical support team is good...It is a scalable solution."
"Excellent autocomplete for everything in the UI."
"The installation step is pretty straightforward."
"Its logs are most valuable."
"Going from viewing a metric to creating a monitor alerting on a metric is very easy."
"I don't have to worry about upgrades with the AWS version."
"The feature I have found most valuable is when I can reuse existing monitors and alerts for new dashboards."
"Datadog's ability to group and visualize the servers and the data makes it relatively easy for the root cause analysis."
"The tools are powerful and intuitive to set up."
"The integration with other systems could be improved."
"The console in older versions is not user-friendly."
"The platform is quite expensive. They should reduce its cost."
"It would be better if the product is cheaper."
"It's not a new product and is a bit complex. So, it requires a person dedicated to working on it and to know about it in and out. It is a huge product, and the search operation is a bit complicated for a new user or someone who has not used it for long. So for that person, it becomes a bit difficult."
"Using the ArcSight Logger dashboard is not particularly intuitive or efficient, so it is important to be trained in its use."
"We have had problems with archiving."
"The solution could be improved in maintenance settings."
"When it comes to storing the logs with Datadog, I'm not sure why it costs so much to store gigabytes or terabytes of information when it's a fraction of the cost to do so myself."
"Additional metrics should be included."
"We need more integration with security tools like Drata."
"The menu on the left is pretty dense (and I know it has to be). I never knew about the cmd+k functionality until recently. It would be helpful to offer more tips/cheat sheets to see handy shortcuts like that."
"It could probably be a little bit of a better user experience."
"There is occasional UI slowness and bugs."
"The error traceability is an area that can be improved."
"When the logs are too big, and Datadog splits them, the JSON format breaks and it is not so useful for us."
ArcSight Logger is ranked 20th in Log Management with 31 reviews while Datadog is ranked 3rd in Log Management with 137 reviews. ArcSight Logger is rated 7.8, while Datadog is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of ArcSight Logger writes "A scalable and stable solution that enables users to see all the event logs in one place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". ArcSight Logger is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security, Wazuh and LogRhythm SIEM, whereas Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability. See our ArcSight Logger vs. Datadog 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.