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

Elastic Search vs Exalead comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Elastic Search
Ranking in Indexing and Search
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (11th), Search as a Service (1st), Vector Databases (1st)
Exalead
Ranking in Indexing and Search
10th
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Indexing and Search category, the mindshare of Elastic Search is 27.8%, up from 25.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Exalead is 4.8%, up from 4.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Indexing and Search
 

Featured Reviews

Anand_Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Captures data from all other sources and becomes a MOM aka monitoring of monitors
Scalability and ROI are the areas they have to improve. Their license terms are based on the number of cores. If you increase the number of cores, it becomes very difficult to manage at a large scale. For example, if I have a $3 million project, I won't sell it because if we're dealing with a 10 TB or 50 TB system, there are a lot of systems and applications to monitor, and I have to make an MOM (Mean of Max) for everything. This is because of the cost impact. Also, when you have horizontal scaling, it's like a multi-story building with only one elevator. You have to run around, and it's not efficient. Even the smallest task becomes difficult. That's the problem with horizontal scaling. They need to improve this because if they increase the cores and adjust the licensing accordingly, it would make more sense.
reviewer916404 - PeerSpot reviewer
The indexing feature is handy but the user interface and support can be better
I am not sure if I will recommend this solution to others. There should definitely be an improvement in the user interface. It should be more friendly and customize until it's perfect. On a scale from 1 to 10, I rate this solution a six, because there is room for improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Elastic Search makes handling large data volumes efficient and supports complex search operations."
"Data indexing of historical data is the most beneficial feature of the product."
"The most valuable feature of Elastic Enterprise Search is user behavior analysis."
"We can easily collect all the data and view historical trends using the product. We can view the applications and identify the issues effectively."
"The solution is very good with no issues or glitches."
"The solution is quite scalable and this is one of its advantages."
"A nonstructured database that can manage large amounts of nonstructured data."
"The most valuable features are the data store and the X-pack extension."
"I find the indexing feature the most valuable."
 

Cons

"The metadata gets stored along with indexes and isn't queryable."
"They should improve its documentation. Their official documentation is not very informative. They can also improve their technical support. They don't help you much with the customized stuff. They also need to add more visuals. Currently, they have line charts, bar charts, and things like that, and they can add more types of visuals. They should also improve the alerts. They are not very simple to use and are a bit complex. They could add more options to the alerting system."
"The pricing of this product needs to be more clear because I cannot understand it when I review the website."
"Elasticsearch could improve by honoring Unix environmental variables and not relying only on those provided by Java (e.g. installing plugins over the Unix http proxy)."
"There are some features lacking in ELK Elasticsearch."
"There is another solution I'm testing which has a 500 record limit when you do a search on Elastic Enterprise Search. That's the only area in which I'm not sure whether it's a limitation on our end in terms of knowledge or a technical limitation from Elastic Enterprise Search. There is another solution we are looking at that rides on Elastic Enterprise Search. And the limit is for any sort of records that you're doing or data analysis you're trying to do, you can only extract 500 records at a time. I know the open-source nature has a lot of limitations, Otherwise, Elastic Enterprise Search is a fantastic solution and I'd recommend it to anyone."
"There are potential improvements based on our client feedback, like unifying the licensing cost structure."
"Could have more open source tools and testing."
"The scalability of the solution is a problem."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is a free, open source software (FOSS) tool, which means no cost on the front-end. There are no free lunches in this world though. Technical skill to implement and support are costly on the back-end with ELK, whether you train/hire internally or go for premium services from Elastic."
"We are paying $1,500 a month to use the solution. If you want to have endpoint protection you need to pay more."
"We use the free version for some logs, but not extensive use."
"The pricing structure depends on the scalability steps."
"The price of Elasticsearch is fair. It is a more expensive solution, like QRadar. The price for Elasticsearch is not much more than other solutions we have."
"We are using the Community Edition because Elasticsearch's licensing model is not flexible or suitable for us. They ask for an annual subscription. We also got the development consultancy from Elasticsearch for 60 days or something like that, but they were just trying to do the same trick. That's why we didn't purchase it. We are just using the Community Edition."
"​The pricing and license model are clear: node-based model."
"The version of Elastic Enterprise Search I am using is open source which is free. The pricing model should improve for the enterprise version because it is very expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Indexing and Search solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ELK Elasticsearch?
Logsign provides us with the capability to execute multiple queries according to our requirements. The indexing is very high, making it effective for storing and retrieving logs. The real-time anal...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ELK Elasticsearch?
I don't know about pricing. That is dealt with by the sales team and our account team. I was not involved with that.
What needs improvement with ELK Elasticsearch?
I found an issue with Elasticsearch in terms of aggregation. They are good, yet the rules written for this are not really good. There is a maximum of 10,000 entries, so the limitation means that if...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

Elastic Enterprise Search, Swiftype, Elastic Cloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Mobile, Adobe, Booking.com, BMW, Telegraph Media Group, Cisco, Karbon, Deezer, NORBr, Labelbox, Fingerprint, Relativity, NHS Hospital, Met Office, Proximus, Go1, Mentat, Bluestone Analytics, Humanz, Hutch, Auchan, Sitecore, Linklaters, Socren, Infotrack, Pfizer, Engadget, Airbus, Grab, Vimeo, Ticketmaster, Asana, Twilio, Blizzard, Comcast, RWE and many others.
Seek
Find out what your peers are saying about Elastic, Luigi's Box, IBM and others in Indexing and Search. Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.