We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and Grafana based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users prefer Grafana over Azure Monitor as it offers highly customizable and visually appealing graphs, flexibility in integration with other tools, and is open-source. Although Grafana's customer service and support have mixed reviews, its ease of setup and moderate pricing make it a popular choice for data visualization and analytics.
"Technical support is good and helpful...The initial setup is easy."
"Log analytics and log queries are the most valuable features of Azure Monitor."
"The most valuable feature is the universality of their functionalities in all Azure services, including, software solutions."
"The solution has tons of valuable features."
"It is a robust, stable product."
"The solution integrates well with the Microsoft platform."
"Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that."
"The upside to the solution is if you are working in a Microsoft or Azure environment, it makes things easier."
"The integration between Loki and Tempo is valuable."
"The product's initial setup phase was very easy."
"Collaboration: Shares data and dashboards across teams."
"The initial setup is straightforward with just a few clicks on the solution's cloud."
"The best thing about Grafana is the visualization. The colors and the ease of use make it very user-friendly."
"The installation process is easy. We have deployed it on the cloud. I have around 20 to 30 people using the solution in my company."
"It is a stable solution."
"Compatibility with Prometheus databases and the Spring Boot application make it the first choice when moving toward an SRE model."
"Azure Monitor could improve network performance monitoring and make it more advanced."
"Currently, it seems it's complicated to get the correct information in terms of what to do and how things work."
"Enhancing and reaching a level of detail that facilitates pinpointing and addressing issues at such a refined level within the application and database components would be helpful."
"The process of implementation needs to be easier."
"The scalability could be improved as there are some limitations."
"There is room for improvement in stability."
"I would like more transparency when we use the solution with another environment, like on-premises, or on another cloud environment, like AWS or GCP."
"The default interface should be improved."
"The security needs to be improved, such as the capacity to add permissions on dashboards."
"It would be helpful if they simplified the data source."
"The solution should include online support."
"Writing queries can be a bit difficult because the syntax must be maintained."
"There is room for improvement when using multiple dashboards because they can become complicated to keep track of and use."
"We need different kinds of applications in our infrastructure to see information in Grafana."
"I would like the ability to download my results into any format in order to share the information with my clients."
"Lacks in-depth graphs and sufficient AI."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while Grafana is ranked 6th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 39 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while Grafana is rated 8.0. 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 Grafana writes "Agent-free with great dashboards and an active community". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and New Relic, whereas Grafana is most compared with New Relic, Sentry, Dynatrace, Elastic Observability and Honeycomb.io. See our Azure Monitor vs. Grafana 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.