We compared Datadog and Splunk Enterprise Security based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Users have mixed opinions about the setup cost for Datadog, with some finding it expensive and others considering it reasonable. They recommend trying out the free plan before committing to a paid subscription. Similarly, some users find Splunk Enterprise Security to be expensive, particularly when handling large amounts of data. Splunk's pricing model, which is based on data processing capacity, can also be constraining. Therefore, when evaluating both products, it is important to take cost into consideration.
Users found Datadog to be beneficial in terms of time-saving, eliminating blindspots, and promptly identifying incidents. On the other hand, Splunk Enterprise Security's return on investment may be challenging to quantify, but it has proven to be crucial in addressing unforeseen issues and improving overall security.
The customer service for Datadog has been positively received, with users appreciating the helpfulness and responsiveness of the support team. They value the availability of 24/7 support. However, there have been occasional instances of slow or unresponsive support, especially in the Asia-Pacific region.
In contrast, the customer service for Splunk Enterprise Security has received both positive and negative feedback. Some users find the support team to be good and helpful. However, others express dissatisfaction with response times and believe that the support team lacks knowledge and care. Overall, there are areas that need improvement for both products in terms of customer service.
Comparison Results
In comparing Datadog to Splunk Enterprise Security, Datadog is praised for its user-friendly features, flexibility, and strong performance. It offers ease of use, effective dashboards and reporting capabilities, and centralized error reporting and log management. It also provides a wide range of integrations and is highly valued by development teams. However, there are areas where Datadog can improve, including usability, setup complexity, security features, and pricing clarity. On the other hand, Splunk Enterprise Security is appreciated for its easy deployment and learning, efficient log aggregation, data analytics, and user-friendly interface. Suggestions for improvement include enhancing user-friendliness, performance, pricing flexibility, and support responsiveness.
"We really like the charts and visualization."
"The integration and configuration are incredibly simple. The SaaS offering is remarkably easy to set up, especially if you're coming from a Graphite environment or anything that uses a StatsD."
"We have found that we're able to get in and out of troubleshooting issues much more rapidly, which in turn, of course, enables us to spend more time on our products."
"The application performance monitoring is pretty good."
"It has scaled great. I haven't run into any problems anywhere that I've used it. They have handled everything that we have needed them to."
"Because of our client focus, it is easy for us to sell. This is because it is easy to use and easy to set up."
"Datadog agents act as an integration to different services, providing easy access and management."
"It brings in observability, monitoring, and alerting capabilities - all of which we need to operate at scale."
"The best part of Splunk Enterprise Security is its customizable settings."
"Splunk has significantly helped with aggregation and correlation of critical logs. Not having to grep on each individual server has made everyone more efficient."
"Correlating data across different systems via one interface will allow you to know your environment or identify incident data in ways you never imagined."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its data modeling."
"The ability to manipulate data in Splunk is unparalleled. Splunk’s powerful, flexible query language can morph difficult to understand log formats into usable data."
"It is easy to use in any environment."
"It definitely does help with both auditing and as well as regular monitoring. SOC does more monitoring, but ES also gives you other features that are auditing-related. The dashboards are also beneficial."
"Being able to track impossible travel logins and things of that nature is valuable. We can track user logins from various IPs, various countries, and at various times to see if everything adds up."
"We would like to see some versioning system for the Synthetic Tests so that we could have a backup of our tests since they are time-consuming to make and very easy to damage in a moment of error."
"It is very difficult to make the solutions fit perfectly for large organizations, especially in terms of high cardinality objects and multi-tenancy, where the data needs to be rolled up to a summarized level while maintaining its individual data granularity and identifiers."
"Ingesting data from various sources to monitor the log metrics of the system can always improve so that, if something goes wrong, the right teams are alerted."
"This service could be less costly."
"We need to learn more about the session reply feature inside of DD."
"It could probably be a little bit of a better user experience."
"Datadog does not have the feature where you can monitor external websites or check the SSL secure for websites."
"Stability of the product has been a concern for us outside of the primary monitoring agents."
"The price of the solution could be cheaper."
"I would like additional features in different programming models with the support for writing queries in SQL or other languages, such as C#, Java, or some other type of query definitions."
"An improved user interface along with multi-tenancy support would be beneficial."
"The product is relatively expensive."
"The only thing which can be improved is that they are too subjective on whom their Splunk4Good initiative can be applied. They market it as you only need to be a nonprofit, but there is more to it."
"The implementation and the scanning of the logs can be difficult."
"One issue is that we are getting a lot of false positives. We are trying to reduce them by customizing the default rules, changing thresholds, and using white-listing and black-listing. It's getting better and better as a result. But they need to build components that would reduce the false positives."
"The ingestion happens quickly, so you can run up the data costs if you use the default settings. It isn't a problem for government agencies in the Saudi market, but many of the corporations in India are small or medium-sized enterprises that cannot afford that kind of ingestion system."
Datadog is ranked 3rd in Log Management with 137 reviews while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 1st in Log Management with 244 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Splunk Enterprise Security writes "It has a drag-and-drop interface, so you don't need to know SQL or Java to construct a query ". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Sentry, whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security and Azure Monitor. See our Datadog vs. Splunk Enterprise Security 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.