We performed a comparison between Datadog and Wazuh based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Datadog users like its customizable displays, error tracking, and advanced AI/ML capabilities. Wazuh stands out for its effortless integration, excellent log monitoring capabilities, and ELK-based investigation. Datadog could enhance its usability and reduce its learning curve. Users said integration was another pain point. Wazuh needs improvements in event source coverage, threat intelligence integration, and real-time monitoring of Unix systems.
Service and Support: While many users spoke highly of Datadog’s support team, others reported slow support, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. Wazuh's customer service is generally deemed satisfactory, and many customers noted that they could easily find answers from community forums.
Ease of Deployment: Datadog’s setup is considered straightforward, and users often receive help from a partner or vendor. Some users said that Wazuh’s setup is easy and fast, while others perceived it as complicated and said it required a significant amount of time.
Pricing: Opinions about Datadog's price are divided. Some users found it costly, but others thought it was acceptable. Some said the pricing model could be clearer and better explained. Wazuh is a cost-effective option as it is open-source and completely free to acquire.
ROI: Users said Datadog saved them time and improved visibility into security blind spots. Wazuh's MSP program and partnerships offer opportunities to generate revenue from the platform.
"The ease with which we can filter, use metrics, and give accounts to customers, then let the customer filter, set up metrics, and alerts. This has been a big win for us."
"The most valuable aspects of the product include the APM and profiler."
"Datadog's log aggregation is really helpful since it lets me and every other engineer on my team login, view, and share logs when we need to debug our application."
"We have a better grasp of what is occurring during the deployment cycle. If something fails, we have an idea what has failed, where it has failed, and how it failed to better mitigate the situation."
"It helps us better manage our logs."
"Datadog has so far been a breeze to use and set up."
"By moving to Datadog, we did not need to manage our own monitoring infrastructure anymore."
"The infrastructure monitoring capabilities are really valuable. You can just log on and see everything that is happening within an IT environment."
"Its cost-effectiveness is the most valuable aspect."
"The configuration assessment and Pile integrity monitoring features are decent."
"It's stable."
"I like the features we use, including malware detection, inventory, detection of hidden processes, and activity logs. Inventory is probably the most important feature. It tells us when processes and packages were installed and what they are, which is helpful."
"The tool is stable."
"I find the PCI DSS feature the most valuable, along with the feature that monitors the compliance of Windows and the CIS benchmarks on other devices like Unix or Linux systems."
"It offers built-in modules for file integrity and vulnerability management."
"Wazuh offers an enhanced HDR version that outperforms its competitors."
"The real issue with this product is cost control."
"Datadog has a lot of features kind of cramped into one dashboard. It's quite hard to get around what feature does exactly what. There was a steep learning curve, trying to navigate through menus."
"Datadog is expensive."
"I would like testing for data in the future."
"I often have issues with the UI in my browser."
"The error traceability is an area that can be improved."
"Billing should be more transparent."
"In the past two years, there have been a couple of outages."
"Log data analysis could be improved. My IT team has been looking for an alternative because they want better log data for malware detection. We are also doing more container implementation also, so we need better container security, log data analysis, auditing and compliance, malware detection, etc."
"Wazuh doesn't cover sources of events as well as Splunk. You can integrate Splunk with many sources of events, but it's a painful process to take care of some sources of events with Wazuh."
"Alerts should be specific rather than repeatedly triggered by integrating multiple factors. This issue needs improvement to create a more efficient alert system."
"The support team could be more responsive and provide quicker replies during our working hours in Indonesia, which would be a significant improvement."
"There's not much I like about Wazuh. Other products I've used were a lot more functional and user friendly. They came with reports and use cases out of the box. We need to configure Wazuh's alerts and monitoring capabilities manually. It'd be nice if we could select from templates and presets for use cases already built and coded."
"Its configuration process is time-consuming."
"Its user interface for sure can be improved. It is not so comfortable to use if you're looking for specific logs."
"One area where Wazuh could use some improvement is in its reporting mechanism, especially for high-level management like CSOs and CEOs."
Datadog is ranked 3rd in Log Management with 137 reviews while Wazuh is ranked 2nd in Log Management with 38 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while Wazuh is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wazuh writes "It integrates seamlessly with AWS cloud-native services". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver), whereas Wazuh is most compared with Elastic Security, Security Onion, Splunk Enterprise Security, AlienVault OSSIM and Microsoft Defender for Cloud. See our Datadog vs. Wazuh 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.