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

Azure Monitor vs Sysdig Monitor comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

Azure Monitor
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (7th), Cloud Monitoring Software (4th)
Sysdig Monitor
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Azure Monitor and Sysdig Monitor aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Azure Monitor is designed for Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability and holds a mindshare of 2.9%, down 7.7% compared to last year.
Sysdig Monitor, on the other hand, focuses on Container Monitoring, holds 2.1% mindshare, up 0.4% since last year.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Monitor2.9%
Dynatrace6.0%
Datadog5.2%
Other85.9%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
Container Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Sysdig Monitor2.1%
Dynatrace28.5%
Datadog24.6%
Other44.8%
Container Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

Andy Rabern - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Telemetry insights have improved how I track user behavior and application performance daily
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it does well. My perspective is more based on an Application Insights agent running on a service or an app service and sending the telemetry via the agent, and also doing the filtering of telemetry at the agent level so you are not having a ton of telemetry. I believe Azure Monitor does pretty much the same thing. I have also used tools such as New Relic, and New Relic is a much more robust tool, but that is a different product and you are going to pay for that. It is a different offering altogether. The subscription that we had at the time allowed for a couple gigabytes of telemetry during the month, and I believe that telemetry only lives for about two months. You have to experiment with it to see how much you want to pay. I was not really involved in the pricing. It was more along the lines of we were running up against our limits in terms of the amount of free telemetry or telemetry that we get with our subscription, and so we either needed to scale back or turn specific telemetry types off or do some more sampling. It is nice that those capabilities are there so that you can reduce the amount of telemetry. I cannot really speak to pricing but I do believe that it is somewhat reasonable for Azure Monitor. New Relic is pretty expensive, I believe.
Bharath Nadar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Staff Site Reliability Engineer at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees
Centralized host monitoring has reduced operational overhead and provides trusted dashboards
Sysdig Monitor could be improved, particularly regarding application monitoring. There are specific areas or features where improvement is needed, specifically in application-level monitoring. While other monitoring solutions provide APM capabilities, Sysdig Monitor does not and targets only host-based monitoring. Many applications require APM support, and we want to introduce OpenTelemetry into some applications to gain more insights, but with Sysdig Monitor, we could not implement this functionality, so we have to opt for solutions from other vendors for those applications. Beyond the APM and OpenTelemetry support limitations, I would appreciate seeing Sysdig Monitor offer a unified solution for all monitoring needs, including logging as well, eventually bringing whole observability under one roof. That would be ideal.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution integrates well with the Microsoft platform."
"The feature that I found most valuable in Azure Monitor is its monitoring abilities. With Azure Monitor, you are able to monitor all of your cloud resources across multiple subscriptions in one dashboard and create solution-specific alerts that can trigger an email to the team responsible for that specific solution."
"Azure Monitor gives us the observability to check everything that we have in the cloud."
"You can scale the product."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the alert system, which can be set according to our metrics. The integration is smooth."
"I am impressed by the reporting on the average eight ports that we get from this solution."
"From a business standpoint, I think the ability to see where your users are is valuable."
"The ease of access in Azure is significant since it's native to the platform and easy to integrate."
"Sysdig Monitor has positively impacted my organization by significantly reducing operational costs and improving our ability to monitor our systems effectively."
"Sysdig Monitor impressed me with its in-depth visibility into my infrastructure."
"The ability to stop/pause and capture logs when something happens is the most valuable feature."
"Docker containers are completely supported, kind of like "first class citizens"."
 

Cons

"Azure Monitor could improve network performance monitoring and make it more advanced."
"What I feel is when I open a screen of Azure, some places are very complex to navigate to. It is not very user-friendly when it comes to accessing certain sections."
"Using Azure Monitor and Azure Arc separately to monitor different environments can be complicated."
"The solution needs better monitoring. It requires better log controls."
"The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics."
"I'd like the solution to do more around vulnerability assessment. It's lacking in the product right now."
"When something goes down, we want the option to have automation in place to get it back up again as quickly as possible."
"The price could be lower but it is not a must."
"It is needs to automate the actions to take when an alert is triggered."
"Sysdig Monitor could be improved, particularly regarding application monitoring."
"I had difficulty installing Sysdig Monitor on Windows."
""Events" reporting (errors, crashes, etc.) is not clear at all in a Mesos environment (i.e., it's not clear what specific container is the one that went down). In a Docker Compose environment, it may be way better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Besides standard licensing fees the customer needs to additionally pay based on the ingested data size"
"Customers of Azure Monitor must pay an amount that depends largely on how many services they need to integrate and the storage space required in terms of logs, etc. If they only have a few small services to monitor, the price won't be too high, but on the opposite side of the spectrum, it can certainly get pricey."
"Azure Monitor is cheaper compared to other third-party monitoring tools."
"The product offers a pay-as-you-go model to users. The charges are to be paid according to the usage of the product."
"Regarding pricing, Azure Monitor is free with Azure license, so there are no additional costs for using it."
"The licensing is a monthly fee."
"The solution’s pricing depends on how much logs it collects."
"There is a monthly fee for the alerts triggered and the data stored."
"Sysdig Monitor is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
883,896 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise29
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What do you like most about Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment.
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sysdig Monitor?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was good. Before moving forward with Sysdig Monitor, we analyzed many other tools, and the costing was more transparent and significantly bette...
What needs improvement with Sysdig Monitor?
Sysdig Monitor could be improved, particularly regarding application monitoring. There are specific areas or features where improvement is needed, specifically in application-level monitoring. Whil...
What is your primary use case for Sysdig Monitor?
Sysdig Monitor has become essential for overseeing a vast array of hosts and EC2 instances across our environment. We initially tried Grafana, but it fell short in operational capabilities. Managin...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
SAP Concur, Goldman Sachs, Worldpay by FIS, Cisco, Experian, Home Office, Societe Generale, Sunrun. More here: https://sysdig.com/customers/
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. Sysdig Monitor and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
883,896 professionals have used our research since 2012.