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 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 is the capability to set up alerts, which becomes necessary when we need to receive notifications for specific events."
"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 effectiveness of filters is pivotal for optimizing the search process and extracting the specific information we need from the extensive log data."
"The log collection feature is good and the solution is easily understandable. v"
"The tool can be used in multi-cluster environments."
"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."
"The query mechanism for response codes and application health is valuable."
"We use the tool to track the dev and production environment."
"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 product for log collection and monitoring."
"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."
"The tool is simple to setup where it is just plug and play. The tool is reliable and we never had any performance issues."
"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 correlation of requests is not simple in Grafana Loki and can be improved."
"The solution's scalability depends on the team managing the Grafana instance."
"Enhancing speed could be a game-changer, and while it might vary depending on the application, it's a factor worth exploring."
"In Grafana Loki, the creation of metrics is not so easy, making it an area that could be made easier."
"The solution has shortcomings regarding security monitoring-oriented features that need improvement."
"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 encountered certain limitations when it came to alerting, particularly when dealing with specific data sources."
"My main concern is the recommended production-grade setup. They suggest using tools like Tanka or Jsonnet. They should simplify the process to increase adoption."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve its data retention. It should be greater than seven days. The product needs to improve its documentation as well."
"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."
"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 product needs improvement from a filtering perspective."
"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."
Grafana Loki is ranked 13th in Log Management with 12 reviews while Logz.io is ranked 23rd 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.