We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and Elastic Observability based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure Monitor has better integration with Microsoft technologies, more out-of-the-box functionalities, lower cost, and better customer support. Elastic Observability is noted for its machine learning and custom development capabilities, but has a steep learning curve, lacks comprehensive visualization and metrics, and could improve pricing. Overall, Azure Monitor is seen as a more robust and stable product that offers a centralized location for resource monitoring.
"The solution works well overall. It's easy to implement and simple to use."
"The most valuable features of Azure Monitor are the login analytics workspace and we can write any kind of custom queries in order to receive the data that is inserted into the login analytics workspace, diagnostic settings, et cetera."
"Technical support is good and helpful...The initial setup is easy."
"The feature that I found most valuable in Azure Monitor is its monitoring abilities. With Azure Monitor, you are able to monitor all of your cloud resources across multiple subscriptions in one dashboard and create solution-specific alerts that can trigger an email to the team responsible for that specific solution."
"Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs."
"The most valuable feature is the universality of their functionalities in all Azure services, including, software solutions."
"The solution integrates well with the Microsoft platform."
"A product that is well-integrated for monitoring Microsoft Azure."
"It's easy to deploy, and it's very flexible."
"For full stack observability, Elastic is the best tool compared with any other tool ."
"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."
"Machine learning is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The solution is open-source and helps with back-end logging. It is also easy to handle."
"We can view and connect different sources to the dashboard using it."
"Its diverse set of features available on the cloud is of significant importance."
"The query builder could be better. In comparison to other monitoring tools, in order to use Azure Monitor, your engineers need to have KQL experience. If they don't, it's not intuitive as a system."
"Azure Monitor could improve the visualization aspect and integrate better with other third-party services."
"If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill."
"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?)."
"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."
"Setting up this solution is complex. It's also missing the functionality of assigning alerts."
"This solution could be improved with more out-of-the-box functionalities and artificial intelligence to complete event correlation."
"I'd like the solution to do more around vulnerability assessment. It's lacking in the product right now."
"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’s price could be improved."
"There's a steep learning curve if you've never used this solution before."
"Improving code insight related to infrastructure and network, particularly focusing on aspects such as firewalls, switches, routers, and testing would be beneficial."
"The solution needs to use more AI. Once the product onboards AI, users would more effectively be able to track endpoints for specific messages."
"The price is the only issue in the solution. It can be made better and cheaper."
"Elastic Observability needs to have better standardization, logging, and schema."
"There could be more low-code features included in the product."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while Elastic Observability is ranked 7th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 22 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while Elastic Observability is rated 7.8. 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 Elastic Observability writes "The user interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. ". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Prometheus, Sentry and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, AppDynamics, Sentry and Datadog. See our Azure Monitor vs. Elastic Observability report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.