We performed a comparison between Amazon CloudWatch and ArcSight Logger based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Scheduling is a valuable feature."
"Most of it's around optimizing utilization, their cloud utilization. They're making sure that they're getting the most out of their in-cloud environments and their instances. Making sure that there's no strange behavior in the environment."
"We can set CPU thresholds using the solution."
"We have found the pricing to be reasonable."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon CloudWatch is the monitoring and UI."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon CloudWatch is its ease of use and logs. You do not have to go to each separate system to see the logs, such as Syslog and they are located in one dashboard GUI."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon CloudWatch is intrusion prevention."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon CloudWatch is collecting the logs from Lambda."
"The most valuable feature is the search capability, which is simple to use."
"It's a robust, mature product and you can do some really complex operations and analytics."
"The technical support team is good...It is a scalable solution."
"I am impressed with the product's ability to pick up logs. It also has UEBA which has reduced the time to take charge of the events."
"ArcSight's robustness is its most valuable feature."
"ArcSight provides the basic information that we want."
"Our return on investment for implementing ArcSight Logger over the past 12 months has been positive."
"We check a lot of logs in ArcSight Logger because we're running a massive database platform."
"The solution's auto-scaling could be improved."
"Incorporating a straightforward method or a plug-and-play solution for integrating these databases with our systems, facilitating smooth data transfer, and enabling the creation of dashboards for monitoring and analysis would be beneficial."
"The monitoring part and GUI are areas in Amazon CloudWatch that have shortcomings currently and can be considered for improvements in the future."
"What would make Amazon CloudWatch better is if it includes more on-site checks, particularly status checks on the CPU, network input/output, etc. It would also be helpful if there's built-in swap space, disk, and memory monitoring in Amazon CloudWatch because, at the moment, my team has to configure it manually through a shell script."
"The product's configuration has some challenges. The solution needs to be more user-friendly."
"I think something that can be improved are the alerts and alerting mechanism based on no rejects. We want to have it more flexible and that is one of the key things that is required."
"It would be beneficial for CloudWatch to provide an API interface and some kind of custom configuration."
"I found several areas for improvement in Amazon CloudWatch. First is that it's tough to track issues and find out where it's going wrong. The process takes longer. For example, if I get an exception error, I read the logs, search, go to AWS Cloud, then to the groups to find the keyword to determine what's wrong. Another area for improvement in Amazon CloudWatch is that it's slow in terms of log streaming. It requires an entire twenty-four hours for scanning, rather than just one hour. This issue can be solved with Elasticsearch streaming with Kibana, but it requires a lot of development effort and integration with Kibana or Splunk, and this also means I need a separate developer and software technical stack to do the indexing and streaming to Kibana. It's a manual effort that you need to do properly, so log streaming should be improved in Amazon CloudWatch. The AWS support person should also have a better understanding of the logs in Amazon CloudWatch. What I'd like added to the solution is a more advanced search function, particularly one that can tell you more information or special information. Right now, the search function is difficult to use because it only gives you limited data. For example, I got an error message saying that the policy wasn't created. I only know the amount the customer paid for the policy, the mobile number, and the customer name, but if I use those details, the information won't show up on the logs. I need to enter more details, so that's the type of fuzzy matching Amazon CloudWatch won't provide. If this type of search functionality is provided, it will be very helpful for businesses and companies that provide professional services to customers, like ours."
"The speed of Logger indexing and searching for certain bugs for some queries that we provide could be improved. It can handle a huge number of logs but it can be improved."
"I had some latency issues for two months. I had to increase our storage capacity significantly to reduce the latency."
"We have had problems with archiving."
"We find that the search and access functionality is quite slow."
"In the next release, I want to see more intelligence."
"It would be better if the product is cheaper."
"The solution should make it possible to integrate network analysis features."
"It is really difficult to work in ArcSight Logger, as it is very slow."
Amazon CloudWatch is ranked 12th in Log Management with 40 reviews while ArcSight Logger is ranked 28th in Log Management with 31 reviews. Amazon CloudWatch is rated 8.0, while ArcSight Logger is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Amazon CloudWatch writes "Instantaneous response when monitoring logs and KPIs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ArcSight Logger writes "A scalable and stable solution that enables users to see all the event logs in one place". Amazon CloudWatch is most compared with Zabbix, Datadog, Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver), Dynatrace and SolarWinds NPM, whereas ArcSight Logger is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security, Wazuh and LogRhythm SIEM. See our Amazon CloudWatch vs. ArcSight Logger 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.
