We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and Grafana based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users prefer Grafana over Azure Monitor as it offers highly customizable and visually appealing graphs, flexibility in integration with other tools, and is open-source. Although Grafana's customer service and support have mixed reviews, its ease of setup and moderate pricing make it a popular choice for data visualization and analytics.
"I am monitoring all of my Azure Monitor and getting good reports. I can customize the reports to get the information I need. I am also getting emails about which AAS instances are down and everything in the system related to my services. It is easy to use, scalable, and user-friendly. Microsoft has Many guides and videos to help you understand how to create and use Azure Monitor."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The solution integrates well with the Microsoft platform."
"Good load and metrics gathering and very good analysis."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to focus on delivery and maximizing the performance of applications and services."
"In the last company where I worked about a year ago, it looked very simple."
"Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment."
"Azure Monitor is very stable."
"Provides good dashboard visualization."
"It excels in providing comprehensive details when there are downtimes or fluctuations, offering thorough reports."
"The initial setup is straightforward with just a few clicks on the solution's cloud."
"The solution can scale well."
"Visualisation: It is easy to create beautiful, understanding graphs, snapshots to share the graphs with people who do not have access to Grafana, and templating to create powerful graphs."
"Grafana's built-in integration with third-party tools, databases, and MQs is an amazing feature."
"What I found most valuable in Grafana is that it has a lot of integrations and features that I need for data processing and visualization."
"We like the alert features."
"Although it's not always the case, the price can sometimes get expensive. This depends on a number of factors, such as how many services you are trying to integrate with Azure Monitor and how much storage they're consuming each month (for example, how large are the log files?)."
"The biggest one is probably just the user interface. There could be more advanced logging at the database level. They can also improve their query builder to allow you to search for things better, but I last used it about a year ago. They might have already changed a ton of things in the newer versions."
"The scalability could be improved as there are some limitations."
"This solution has fewer features than some of its competitors, so adding more features to it would make it better."
"n comparison to New Relic, which I've used before, it's a bit more complicated. It's not as easy to use. It also took some time to get it working. The implementation needs to be simpler."
"The length of latency is terrible and needs to be improved."
"In terms of pricing, Azure Monitor's billing based on data size can sometimes lead to increased costs, especially when developers need to purge data frequently. While there are mechanisms in place to track and manage this, there is room for improvement in terms of optimizing data pausing and related processes. Enhancements in this area could help mitigate potential billing concerns and provide a more seamless experience for users."
"The monitoring of Kubernetes clusters needs improvement to be on par with competitors."
"It can take a considerable amount of time to learn the graphs if a long duration is selected."
"I would like the ability to download my results into any format in order to share the information with my clients."
"Lacks event management which affects our DevOps people."
"The service dashboard is very hard and needs improvement."
"The solution has room for improvement with a better API to help automate the construction of the dashboards easier."
"We need different kinds of applications in our infrastructure to see information in Grafana."
"The documentation or training provided by Grafana is limited compared to its competitors, like Splunk."
"It would be helpful if Grafana provided more information and training on how to use Prometheus."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 45 reviews while Grafana is ranked 6th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 39 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while Grafana is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Grafana writes "Agent-free with great dashboards and an active community". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and New Relic, whereas Grafana is most compared with New Relic, Sentry, Elastic Observability, Dynatrace and Honeycomb.io. See our Azure Monitor vs. Grafana report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.