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

Check Point Security Management vs Grafana Loki comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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

Check Point Security Manage...
Ranking in Log Management
6th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (13th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (5th)
Grafana Loki
Ranking in Log Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of Check Point Security Management is 0.4%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Grafana Loki is 8.7%, up from 4.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Log Management
 

Featured Reviews

NareshKumar10 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced Internal Security and Efficiency
Check Point Security Management can be improved by addressing a negative challenge I face: sometimes it does not show internet utilization in the GUI. When I ask support, they tell me to upgrade the firmware, which happens quite frequently. Since I deployed the device in my on-premises environment 1.5 years ago, I have experienced this issue three times. Check Point Security Management has not impacted my daily work or decision-making in any negative way. As an IT person, I occasionally need to check how much internet bandwidth has been used in the internal network over the past month, day, or week. During those times, when I open the data utilization column, it shows nothing available. Each time this happens, I need to upgrade to the latest version of the firmware, and this frequent updating affects my productivity negatively. If Check Point addresses this issue in the future, it will be beneficial for all customers using Check Point SMBs.
Volodymyr Bondarchuk - PeerSpot reviewer
Integrations enhance monitoring but problem-solving proves challenging
Different types of integrations with various sources are the most helpful and useful features of Grafana Loki that I found for myself. As part of Kubernetes technology, I noticed benefits from using this product such as availability, configuration balancing, high availability solutions for high performance, and failover clustering. It provides a clear picture about the state of the system and gives needed information for taking action and quickly fixing problems.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the most outstanding characteristics of its centralized administration is its great computing power."
"The most valuable feature for me is Identity Awareness."
"The centralized logs and management are helpful."
"Check Point's management portal and firmware are very stable and don't require frequent maintenance. Their IPSec tunneling is very stable, especially with Azure and AWS networks."
"With the generation and review of logs, we have verified some vulnerabilities and attempted attacks to generate improvements in our infrastructure and policies to help avoid issues in the future."
"It's already helped secure our organization effectively."
"Regarding the tool's valuable features, I would say that Check Point is a very accessible and fast tool, especially when dealing with logs for the first time."
"It's a reliable solution for security."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the tool's GUI. The solution's GUI is very user-friendly."
"The effectiveness of filters is pivotal for optimizing the search process and extracting the specific information we need from the extensive log data."
"Loki significantly saves time in troubleshooting by quickly pinpointing network issues."
"The product's most valuable features are ease of installation, management, and reporting. It has an efficient ability to set thresholds for alerts, as well."
"We are using Grafana Loki as a database for real-time metrics."
"I appreciate the capability to process logs from microservices and seamlessly integrate them into Grafana."
"The best feature of Grafana Loki is that it integrates well with our other tool."
"There are new features like that pilot code and things like that for profiling."
 

Cons

"The management API can be further developed so that all functions offered by the dashboard are also available via the API (for example, Network Topology)."
"You need some technical expertise to use the solution. I don't think it's accessible to the typical end-user. You need to access the box and use some command lines or the web interface. It would be nice to have a user-friendly dashboard and comprehensive reporting."
"I've found the solution was a bit unstable."
"As per personal experience and based on many organizations, Check Point needs to improve PS services."
"Even though the platform is simple, and creating security policies is a fairly quick task, creating a bulk of policies at once (ie. for a migration) could be a useful tool. This is probably possible through scripting, however, having an easy-to-use "import CSV" button would be beneficial."
"Check Point could improve by enhancing the networking in their solution in order to align it with the existing network architecture."
"Troubleshooting is quite complicated within multi-domain management. If an issue arises, the local administrator has to keep in mind that there are other domains that could be also affected."
"I would like for users to have more control over the platform in the next release. Right now, the system is very central and general requiring new rules to be created that better-suite our requirements."
"The correlation of requests is not simple in Grafana Loki and can be improved."
"It would be beneficial if Loki could directly access Windows Server logs or events directly from the servers."
"The solution has shortcomings regarding security monitoring-oriented features that need improvement."
"It's not intended for proprietary services, so you have to struggle with configuration a lot."
"We had a well-structured dashboard with a functional query. However, an issue arose when the Kubernetes pod restarted. The statistics from our Grafana query would reset, dropping to zero and starting anew. This was particularly noticeable with linear graphs, which are expected to show consistent growth."
"The product must improve its UI."
"Enhancing speed could be a game-changer, and while it might vary depending on the application, it's a factor worth exploring."
"Visualization-wise, Grafana Loki's dashboard looks a little outdated compared to other open-source visualization tools like Chronograf."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing can be estimated around 3 or 4 out of 10 in terms of expense."
"The solution is expensive."
"This product can be used for 25 security gateways on a basic license."
"Check Point is much cheaper than the competition ($4/server as compared to $17/server)."
"If one will be very expensive, and ten means low price, I rate the tool's price as a three out of ten."
"Price-wise, it is an expensive solution."
"The solution is expensive and there is an annual license."
"Do the homework because Check Point is rather expensive."
"I use the solution's open-source version. Grafana Loki is a completely free solution for me."
"Grafana Loki is an open-source solution."
"Since we are using the open-source version of Grafana Loki, we are not paying anything for the solution."
"I find the licensing structure quite reasonable, as the free license effectively meets my requirements."
"The pricing structure varies based on the number of users; there might be specific taxes to pay for it."
"Grafana Loki is a free, open-source solution."
"You can use the free version of Grafana Loki on-premises."
"My company doesn't need to pay for the licensing cost of the solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.
859,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Check Point Security Management?
The most beneficial features for us are the alert classifications, which help us prioritize critical issues, and the detailed reports that provide insights into attack origins and purposes, such as...
What needs improvement with Check Point Security Management?
Check Point Security Management can be improved by addressing a negative challenge I face: sometimes it does not show internet utilization in the GUI. When I ask support, they tell me to upgrade th...
What is your primary use case for Check Point Security Management?
My main use case for Check Point Security Management is using it as a firewall, which ignores all my data threats, and it is useful to secure my inside IT infrastructure. It secures all the data an...
What do you like most about Grafana Loki?
We are using Grafana Loki as a database for real-time metrics.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Grafana Loki?
Since it is an open source tool, there are no charges or fees.
What needs improvement with Grafana Loki?
I have no ideas at this moment about what could be improved in Grafana Loki.
 

Also Known As

R80.10, R80, R77.30, R77, Check Point R80.10 Security Management, R80 Security Management
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hedgetec, Geiger
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Security Management vs. Grafana Loki and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.