Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Algolia vs Solr comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Algolia
Ranking in Search as a Service
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Solr
Ranking in Search as a Service
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Search as a Service category, the mindshare of Algolia is 8.5%, up from 5.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Solr is 6.6%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Search as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

Alejandro Salazar - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers extensive customization options, allowing users to tailor search results to their specific needs
There are two problems. Number one, it's a bit pricey, especially when there are similar algorithms. There's one called Typesense, which we considered to lower our bill. Algolia is good for a startup because it allows you to bootstrap powerful functionalities quickly. But if that startup ends up growing and becomes quite successful, the cost of Algolia will balloon with it. So, I could imagine that Algolia might have difficulty retaining clients. The other problem I had to deal with as the lead software engineer is the documentation. I was basically assigned a guy who had no idea how Algolia works, and I had to get it to work, which I did. But the documentation for the service is not as good as it could be. You can still figure it out, but Algolia has a lot of functionalities, not just the search engine. They have built-in components for different UI libraries. In our case, we were using React, and they have a third-party library that you can import to use Algolia services as React components. It's great, but they have very little documentation for those kinds of third-party things. It's tough to use them if you don't explain to your potential developers how they're supposed to be used. I eventually had to call them directly and sit down with their engineers, and I realized that it's a great product, but they need to explain it better.
reviewer1368636 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good indexing and decent stability, but requires more documentation
The solution's grammar and syntax should be easier. It does take a little bit of effort to use and understand the solution. It would help us a lot if the solution offered up more documentation or tutorials to help with training or troubleshooting. MongoDB can realize more complex operations than Solr can. Solr should add some more complex operations to the database to at least bring it up to MondoDB's level of functionality. It would make it more competitive. There might be some compatibility issues between the data types within Solr. This needs to be improved. Solr has a schema that we have to load the schema as an HTML, or SML file. This usually needs to be done by our engineers. It should be easier to do without needing too much technical background.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We were working with search products, brands, and different attributes specific to the product; it's faster and easier. The implementation is easy."
"It has many fine-tuning configurations. Essentially, every single piece of information you pass through it is a free document you can tailor."
"It's scalable. It can be scaled massively."
"The tool is worth the money, and I have seen an ROI."
"The Algolia solution really helped us to improve our conversion rate and click through rate."
"Algolia provides some cool functionalities like filtering, indexing, and searching."
"The tool is easy to use, but you need to know how it works."
"Since Algolia is a SaaS solution, we didn't have to maintain servers, look at the indexes, and monitor services."
"One of the best aspects of the solution is the indexing. It's already indexed to all the fields in the category. We don't need to spend so much extra effort to do the indexing. It's great."
"​Sharding data, Faceting, Hit Highlighting, parent-child Block Join and Grouping, and multi-mode platform are all valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to perform a natural language search."
"It has improved our search ranking, relevancy, search performance, and user retention."
 

Cons

"The deployment could be easier for beginners."
"When indexing the products, one may face some issues with the tool."
"The high cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Joining is quite complex."
"Algolia provides a certification, which is pretty basic, and I think it can be improved in terms of a bit more detail and more elaborative content."
"The documentation for the service is not as good as it could be."
"The documentation is not beginner-friendly."
"Algolia is not adopted that much, and it would be great if it were made more popular."
"Encountered issues with both master-slave and SolrCloud. Indexing and serving traffic from same collection has very poor performance. Some components are slow for searching."
"The performance for this solution, in terms of queries, could be improved."
"SolrCloud stability, indexing and commit speed, and real-time Indexing need improvement."
"With increased sharding, performance degrades. Merger, when present, is a bottle-neck. Peer-to-peer sync has issues in SolrCloud when index is incrementally updated."
"It does take a little bit of effort to use and understand the solution. It would help us a lot if the solution offered up more documentation or tutorials to help with training or troubleshooting."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For any developer starting out, it is worth it."
"Algolia is a cool, super-easy-to-use, and affordable tool."
"The product is cheap."
"I have heard that Algolia is an expensive solution."
"In terms of the cost of Algolia, the tool is really expensive for us in Brazil since it comes to about half a million dollars."
"We are currently on a contract with Algolia for licensing and price."
"The only costs in addition to the standard licensing fees are related to the hardware, depending on whether it is cloud-based, or on-premise."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Search as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Media Company
7%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
6%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Algolia?
Algolia is a cool, super-easy-to-use, and affordable tool. Suppose a company's customer is looking for Algolia's search indexing. Considering such cases, an organization needs to be ready to pay th...
What needs improvement with Algolia?
There are no areas in the product where improvements are required. I believe it is one of the best products right now. When indexing the products, one may face some issues with the tool.
What is your primary use case for Algolia?
I use Algolia for Magento 2 e-commerce websites so that I can enhance user search functionality. Throughout Algolia, our company can enhance our search results as per the user type, which can impro...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Birchbox, Twitch, Lacoste, Stripe, WW, Medium, Cousera, National Geographic, Zendesk, Magento
eHarmony, Sears, StubHub, Best Buy, Instagram, Netflix, Disney, AT&T, eBay, AOL, Bloomberg, Comcast, Ticketmaster, Travelocity, MTV Networks
Find out what your peers are saying about Algolia vs. Solr and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.