We performed a comparison between Grafana Loki and Logz.io 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 effectiveness of filters is pivotal for optimizing the search process and extracting the specific information we need from the extensive log data."
"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 is the capability to set up alerts, which becomes necessary when we need to receive notifications for specific events."
"The solution's stability has never been a problem. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine to ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of Grafana Loki is the dashboards which are really simple to create."
"The tool can be used in multi-cluster environments."
"I appreciate the capability to process logs from microservices and seamlessly integrate them into Grafana."
"We are using Grafana Loki as a database for real-time metrics."
"The other nice thing about Logz.io is their team. When it comes to onboarding, their support is incredibly proactive. They bring the brand experience from a customer services perspective because their team is always there to help you refine filters and tweak dashboards. That is really a useful thing to have. Their engagement is really supportive."
"The visualizations in Kibana are the most valuable feature. It's much more convenient to have a visualization of logs. We can see status really clearly and very fast, with just a couple of clicks."
"It is massively useful and great for testing. We can just go, find logs, and attach them easily. It has a very quick lookup. Whereas, before we would have to go, dig around, and find the server that the logs were connected to, then go to the server, download the log, and attach it. Now, we can just go straight to this solution, type in the log ID and server ID, and obtain the information that we want."
"The tool is simple to setup where it is just plug and play. The tool is reliable and we never had any performance issues."
"InsightOne is the main reason why we use LogMeIn. This is mostly because of log data that we are pushing tools and logs in general."
"We use the tool to track the dev and production environment."
"The query mechanism for response codes and application health is valuable."
"We use the product for log collection and monitoring."
"We encountered certain limitations when it came to alerting, particularly when dealing with specific data sources."
"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."
"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."
"The Docker container partition feature needs improvement as they do not reuse the space and goes into a pending state."
"The product must improve its UI."
"The solution's scalability depends on the team managing the Grafana instance."
"The solution has shortcomings regarding security monitoring-oriented features that need improvement."
"Visualization-wise, Grafana Loki's dashboard looks a little outdated compared to other open-source visualization tools like Chronograf."
"Capacity planning could be a little bit of a struggle."
"I would like granularity on alerting so we can get tentative alerts and major alerts, then break it down between the two."
"When it comes to reducing our troubleshooting time, it depends. When there are no bugs in Logz.io, it reduces troubleshooting by 5 to 10 percent. When there are bugs, it increases our troubleshooting time by 200 percent or more."
"The price can be cheaper and they should have better monitoring."
"The solution needs to expand its access control and make it accessible through API."
"I would like them to improve how they manage releases. Some of our integrations integrate specifically with set versions. Logz.io occasionally releases an update that might break that integration. On one occasion, we found out a little bit too late, then we had to roll it back."
"The solution needs to improve its data retention. It should be greater than seven days. The product needs to improve its documentation as well."
"The product needs improvement from a filtering perspective."
Grafana Loki is ranked 13th in Log Management with 12 reviews while Logz.io is ranked 24th in Log Management with 8 reviews. Grafana Loki is rated 8.0, while Logz.io is rated 8.2. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Logz.io writes "The solution is a consistent logging platform that provides excellent query mechanisms". Grafana Loki is most compared with Graylog, Wazuh, syslog-ng, Splunk Enterprise Security and Fortinet FortiAnalyzer, whereas Logz.io is most compared with Datadog, Wazuh, Coralogix, Microsoft Sentinel and ManageEngine File Audit Plus. See our Grafana Loki vs. Logz.io 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.
