We performed a comparison between Coralogix and Grafana Loki 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 solution is easy to use and to start with."
"The best feature of this solution allows us to correlate logs, metrics and traces."
"Numerous data monitoring tools are available, but Coralogix somehow fine-tunes our policies and effectively supports our teams."
"The solution offers very good convenience filtering."
"A non-tech person can easily get used to it."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The best feature of Grafana Loki is that it integrates well with our other tool."
"I appreciate the capability to process logs from microservices and seamlessly integrate them into Grafana."
"Loki also utilizes the same service discovery mechanism as used by Prometheus. So, whatever labeled metadata you see in Prometheus, you have the exact same metadata in the Loki system. Given this level of intricacy and the attempt to address these challenges, I firmly believe that Loki deserves praise for the work."
"The most valuable feature of Grafana Loki is the dashboards which are really simple to create."
"The solution's stability has never been a problem. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine to ten out of ten."
"The tool can be used in multi-cluster environments."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is an open-source tool that is stable and flexible."
"The effectiveness of filters is pivotal for optimizing the search process and extracting the specific information we need from the extensive log data."
"It would be helpful if Coralogix could integrate the main modules that any organization requires into a single subscription."
"From my experience, Coralogix has horrible Terraform providers."
"We want it to work at what it is expected to work at and not really based on the updated configuration which one developer has decided to change."
"Maybe they could make it more user-friendly."
"The documentation of the tool could be improved"
"The user interface could be more intuitive and explanatory."
"In Grafana Loki, the creation of metrics is not so easy, making it an area that could be made easier."
"We encountered certain limitations when it came to alerting, particularly when dealing with specific data sources."
"The correlation of requests is not simple in Grafana Loki and can be improved."
"The Docker container partition feature needs improvement as they do not reuse the space and goes into a pending state."
"Visualization-wise, Grafana Loki's dashboard looks a little outdated compared to other open-source visualization tools like Chronograf."
"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."
"The solution's scalability depends on the team managing the Grafana instance."
"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."
Coralogix is ranked 23rd in Log Management with 7 reviews while Grafana Loki is ranked 13th in Log Management with 12 reviews. Coralogix is rated 8.4, while Grafana Loki is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Coralogix writes "Good capabilities, has a helpful interface and is straightforward to set up". On the other hand, 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". Coralogix is most compared with Datadog, Grafana, Sentry, New Relic and LogRhythm SIEM, whereas Grafana Loki is most compared with Graylog, Wazuh, syslog-ng and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Coralogix vs. Grafana Loki 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.
