We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and Prometheus 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 is the preferred option over Prometheus due to its comprehensive features and seamless integration with other Microsoft technologies. It offers log analysis, graphs, charts, and reporting, making it a convenient one-stop-shop for monitoring all resources. Although Prometheus is highly flexible and compatible, it lacks user-friendly visualization tools and a reliable customer service system.
"The solution integrates well with the Microsoft platform."
"I am monitoring all of my Azure Monitor and getting good reports. I can customize the reports to get the information I need. I am also getting emails about which AAS instances are down and everything in the system related to my services. It is easy to use, scalable, and user-friendly. Microsoft has Many guides and videos to help you understand how to create and use Azure Monitor."
"In the last company where I worked about a year ago, it looked very simple."
"The upside to the solution is if you are working in a Microsoft or Azure environment, it makes things easier."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Technical support is good and helpful...The initial setup is easy."
"Data exporting is easy, and this tool works seamlessly with other solutions. It's a stable and low-priced solution."
"Azure Monitor's best features are its graphs and charts, the different visibility options, and reporting."
"It is an efficient solution."
"Prometheus gives us high availability automatically."
"The solution can be deployed in thirty minutes."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Prometheus provides a flexible and adjustable querying and describing time, allowing for more responsive monitoring."
"It has lots of APIs and libraries to integrate with any kind of language."
"The sky is the limit because the solution is a flexible open box that can be used vastly to do anything you need to monitor applications."
"The product has an easy-to-understand interface."
"If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill."
"There are a lot of things that take more time to do, such as charting, alerting, and correlation of data, and things like that. Azure Monitor doesn't tell you why something happened. It just tells you that it happened. It should also have some type of AI. Environments and applications are becoming more and more complex every day with hundreds or thousands of microservices. Therefore, having to do a lot of the stuff manually takes a lot of time, and on top of that, troubleshooting issues takes a lot of time. The traditional method of troubleshooting doesn't really work for or apply to this environment we're in. So, having an AI-based system and the ability to automate deployments of your monitoring and configurations makes it much easier."
"The solution needs better monitoring. It requires better log controls."
"In terms of pricing, Azure Monitor's billing based on data size can sometimes lead to increased costs, especially when developers need to purge data frequently. While there are mechanisms in place to track and manage this, there is room for improvement in terms of optimizing data pausing and related processes. Enhancements in this area could help mitigate potential billing concerns and provide a more seamless experience for users."
"As a younger product it still has room for feature improvement and enhancement."
"The monitoring of Kubernetes clusters needs improvement to be on par with competitors."
"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?)."
"This solution could be improved with more out-of-the-box functionalities and artificial intelligence to complete event correlation."
"The solution has shortcomings regarding security monitoring-oriented features to support custom use cases, like out-of-the-box test scenarios and threat-related use cases of its users."
"The setup could be made easier for new users because it requires a bit of advance knowledge or experience."
"Prometheus' UI color can improve. Using the Prometheus UI for configuration or analyzing queries is a horrible experience."
"Lacks the ability to clusterize."
"The query language in Prometheus is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"A slight alteration to the user interface should be made to increase efficiency and streamline the process. Currently, we are utilizing Prometheus to gather and compile metrics and then utilizing Grafana to display them in the form of a graph. However, I believe that Prometheus has the capability to handle both of these tasks on its own, with perhaps the addition of a supplementary plugin. By doing so, the need for utilizing two separate applications will be eliminated."
"Its stability could be even better."
"When it comes to deployment, if you have no experience with something like a CI/CD pipeline, it might be a challenge."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while Prometheus is ranked 9th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 32 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while Prometheus is rated 8.4. 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 Prometheus writes "A very flexible open box that can be used vastly to do anything you need". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Grafana and New Relic, whereas Prometheus is most compared with New Relic, Dynatrace, Sentry, AWS X-Ray and ITRS Geneos. See our Azure Monitor vs. Prometheus report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.