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

Algolia vs Elastic Search 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

Algolia
Ranking in Search as a Service
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Elastic Search
Ranking in Search as a Service
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
Indexing and Search (1st), Cloud Data Integration (5th), Vector Databases (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Search as a Service category, the mindshare of Algolia is 9.7%, up from 8.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Elastic Search is 18.3%, up from 14.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Search as a Service Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Elastic Search18.3%
Algolia9.7%
Other72.0%
Search as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

Alejandro Salazar - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Investment Officer at University of California, Berkeley
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.
Anurag Pal - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Search and aggregations have transformed how I manage and visualize complex real estate data
Elastic Search consumes lots of memory. You have to provide the heap size a lot if you want the best out of it. The major problem is when a company wants to use Elastic Search but it is at a startup stage. At a startup stage, there is a lot of funds to consider. However, their use case is that they have to use a pretty significant amount of data. For that, it is very expensive. For example, if you take OLTP-based databases in the current scenario, such as ClickHouse or Iceberg, you can do it on 4GB RAM also. Elastic Search is for analytical records. You have to do the analytics on it. According to me, as far as I have seen, people will start moving from Elastic Search sooner or later. Why? Because it is expensive. Another thing is that there is an open source available for that, such as ClickHouse. Around 2014 and 2012, there was only one competitor at that time, which was Solr. But now, not only is Solr there, but you can take ClickHouse and you have Iceberg also. How are we going to compete with them? There is also a fork of Elastic Search that is OpenSearch. As far as I have seen in lots of articles I am reading, users are using it as the ELK stack for logs and analyzing logs. That is not the exact use case. It can do more than that if used correctly. But as it involves lots of cost, people are shifting from Elastic Search to other sources. When I am talking about pricing, it is not only the server pricing. It is the amount of memory it is using. The pricing is basically the heap Java, which is taking memory. That is the major problem happening here. If we have to run an MVP, a client comes to me and says, "Anurag, we need to do a proof of concept. Can we do it if I can pay a 4GB or 16GB expense?" How can I suggest to them that a minimum of 16GB is needed for Elastic Search so that your proof of concept will be proved? In that case, what I have to suggest from the beginning is to go with Cassandra or at the initial stage, go with PostgreSQL. The problem is the memory it is taking. That is the only thing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool is easy to use, but you need to know how it works."
"We were working with search products, brands, and different attributes specific to the product; it's faster and easier. The implementation is easy."
"The tool provides users with personalization features that can be used to improve user interface."
"The Algolia solution really helped us to improve our conversion rate and click through rate."
"It's scalable. It can be scaled massively."
"The tool is worth the money, and I have seen an ROI."
"It has many fine-tuning configurations. Essentially, every single piece of information you pass through it is a free document you can tailor."
"Since Algolia is a SaaS solution, we didn't have to maintain servers, look at the indexes, and monitor services."
"Gives us a more user-friendly, centralized solution (for those who just needed a quick glance, without being masters of sed and awk) as well as the ability to implement various mechanisms for machine-learning from our logs, and sending alerts for anomalies."
"Search is really powerful."
"Elastic Enterprise Search is scalable. On a scale of one to 10, with one being not scalable and 10 being very scalable, I give Elastic Enterprise Search a 10."
"The observability is the best available because it provides granular insights that identify reasons for defects."
"The solution has good security features. I have been happy with the dashboards and interface."
"I would recommend Elastic Search to other people who want to have fast search in their applications."
"I have found the sort capability of Elastic very useful for allowing us to find the information we need very quickly."
"The most valuable features are its user-friendly interface and seamless navigation."
 

Cons

"The high cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I think they could improve the analytics view."
"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."
"Joining is quite complex."
"When indexing the products, one may face some issues with the tool."
"The deployment could be easier for beginners."
"The documentation for the service is not as good as it could be."
"Algolia is not adopted that much, and it would be great if it were made more popular."
"Ratio aggregation is not supported in this solution."
"Elastic Enterprise Search's tech support is good but it could be improved."
"We'd like to see more integration in the future, especially around service desks or other ITSM tools."
"I would rate technical support from Elastic Search as three out of ten. The main issue is a general sum of all factors."
"I would like to see more integration for the solution with different platforms."
"In Elastic Search, the improvements I would like to see require many resources."
"There is a lack of technical people to develop, implement and optimize equipment operation and web queries."
"The reports could improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The product is cheap."
"For any developer starting out, it is worth it."
"Algolia is a cool, super-easy-to-use, and affordable tool."
"I have heard that Algolia is an expensive solution."
"We are currently on a contract with Algolia for licensing and price."
"An X-Pack license is more affordable than Splunk."
"Although the ELK Elasticsearch software is open-source, we buy the hardware."
"The price could be better."
"The price of Elastic Enterprise is very, very competitive."
"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."
"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."
"We are using the free open-sourced version of this solution."
"The tool is not expensive. Its licensing costs are yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Search as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
882,103 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
14%
Performing Arts
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business37
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise44
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Algolia?
The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Algolia are based on a pay-as-you-go model, which is very efficient. The costs are very transparent and have detailed breakdowns for any kind of queries c...
What needs improvement with Algolia?
Algolia provides good value for money. However, personally, I feel the UI is a bit difficult to understand and could be more user-centric. The navigation part of Algolia is different from other too...
What is your primary use case for Algolia?
Algolia is used in my organization primarily for AI search to enhance product search for recommendations. It helps us support our knowledge bases, particularly Confluence, and maximizes the outcome...
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?
On the subject of pricing, Elastic Search is very cost-efficient. You can host it on-premises, which would incur zero cost, or take it as a SaaS-based service, where the expenses remain minimal.
What needs improvement with ELK Elasticsearch?
While Elastic Search is a good product, I see areas for improvement, particularly regarding the misconception that any amount of data can simply be dumped into Elastic Search. When creating an inde...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Elastic Enterprise Search, Swiftype, Elastic Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Birchbox, Twitch, Lacoste, Stripe, WW, Medium, Cousera, National Geographic, Zendesk, Magento
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.
Find out what your peers are saying about Algolia vs. Elastic Search and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,103 professionals have used our research since 2012.