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."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 is open-source and helps with back-end logging. It is also easy to handle."
"The solution has been stable in our usage."
"It's easy to deploy, and it's very flexible."
"I have built a mini business intelligence system based on Elastic Observability."
"The architecture and system's stability are simple."
"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."
"The product has connectors to many services."
"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."
"It gives us reporting features, which are helpful in the case of troubleshooting and audit purposes."
"The solution is very easy to deploy."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiAnalyzer are the dashboards and supporting services."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to create a customized dashboard."
"It is a simple and solution."
"Support is helpful."
"The product works well with other products."
"Elastic APM's visualization is not that great compared to other tools. It's number of metrics is very low."
"More web features could be added to the product."
"In the future, Elastic APM needs a portfolio iTool. They can provide an easy way to develop the custom UI for Kibana."
"Improving code insight related to infrastructure and network, particularly focusing on aspects such as firewalls, switches, routers, and testing would be beneficial."
"The auto-discovery isn't nearly as good. That's a big portion of it. When you drop the agent onto the JVM and you're trying to figure things out, having to go through and manually do all that is cumbersome."
"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."
"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 interface could be improved."
"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 solution is expensive."
"The following could be better: operation and maintenance, high-availability architecture, and management link embedded in the transmission link."
"Pricing-wise, it not affordable for the normal customer. Most of the people want to see different types of reporting, but FortiAnalyzer's fee is a little bit difficult."
"It is very important that FAZ can support FortiController as the architecture designed for the network. FortiController should be registered in FAZ at least for event logs."
"The solution can improve the incident response function to provide more detailed information on where the incident is originating."
"The cloud version can be expensive. If the customers could get the resources to store the logs on-premises, it would be much better."
"It should have customized reports as well. While it currently has them, you need to write a script which is not straightforward."
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.
