We performed a comparison between Elastic Observability and Loom Systems 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 price is very less expensive compared to the other solutions."
"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 most valuable feature of Elastic Observability is the text search."
"The Elastic User Interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. You need to have some Javascript knowledge. We need that knowledge to develop new custom tests."
"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."
"It is a powerful tool that allows users to collect and transform logs as needed, enabling flexible visualization and analysis."
"The solution is open-source and helps with back-end logging. It is also easy to handle."
"It's easy to deploy, and it's very flexible."
"The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"The cost must be made more transparent."
"If we had some pre-defined templates for observability that we could start using right away after deploying it – instead of having to build or to change some of the dashboards – that would be helpful."
"Elastic Observability needs to have better standardization, logging, and schema."
"The interface could be improved."
"The solution would be better if it was capable of more automation, especially in a monitoring capacity or for the response to abnormalities."
"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."
"Elastic Observability needs to improve the retrieval of logs and metrics from all the instances."
"More web features could be added to the product."
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."
Elastic Observability is ranked 10th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews while Loom Systems is ranked 58th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 4 reviews. Elastic Observability is rated 7.8, while Loom Systems 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 Loom Systems writes "Simple and very effective for developing and configuring apps with great integration capabilities". Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, Azure Monitor, Sentry and AppDynamics, whereas Loom Systems is most compared with Elastic Search, VMware Aria Operations for Applications and Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring. See our Elastic Observability vs. Loom Systems report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.