No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Devo vs Groundcover Observability Platform 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

Devo
Ranking in Log Management
18th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (18th), IT Operations Analytics (7th), AIOps (13th)
Groundcover Observability P...
Ranking in Log Management
41st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (47th), AI Observability (25th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of Devo is 1.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Groundcover Observability Platform is 0.4%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Log Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Devo1.4%
Groundcover Observability Platform0.4%
Other98.2%
Log Management
 

Featured Reviews

Usama Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead SOC at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Advanced threat hunting has improved SOC visibility and now supports faster incident response
Devo can improve in how its connectors enhance integration with third-party tools. Devo's architecture works by having you deploy a relay server in the data center of the client side and Devo SIEM is basically on the AWS cloud. There are specific ports which are enabled on the relay server, which are 514 and 13000, 13151, 152. However, when we talk about databases and custom integrations, there are not default ports in the relay server. No default ports are defined. For JDBC drivers, the port number is 1433, but it is not in the relay server. You have to add it manually. For Oracle RDBMS, the port is 1521, and it is also not there by default. I would appreciate more third-party integrations including Fortinet and others. Machine learning models can also be improved. Playbooks in the SOAR can also be improved. Regarding playbooks for automation, we utilize playbooks for automation in SOAR for automated IOC blocking on a firewall, on a web application firewall, on DNS security, etc. The only option for us to run the playbook is to schedule the job for it. However, if I want to manually run the playbook, there is no option for doing so. This needs improvement.
EO
Software Engineer at FairMoney
Centralized observability has improved transaction monitoring and now reduces errors through faster troubleshooting
Groundcover Observability Platform is already very vast, and improving it requires proper training for even a software developer to be able to use it. A person in tech needs training to navigate the system. The UI is better, but it can be improved to include a more intuitive design that easily explains itself to users so that navigation is simpler. Many features are hidden, and you need someone who is experienced with the platform to direct you on how to view certain information or complete specific tasks and walk you through the process. It would be better if Groundcover focused more on simplifying the user interface and improving human-computer interactions of the dashboard to make it so easy for a new developer or specialist to navigate and get what they need quickly. Querying data from Groundcover is not easy if you do not have specific information. You cannot perform a wildcard search in the text box. If you go to the log and enter an error message, it will not bring any results for you. You must first specify the workload or pods you are looking for, then enter the error. You need to add tags and put in your strings to be able to search for your particular logs or errors. If you just put a wildcard search in the text box, it will not work and will appear as if there are no logs that relate to that search, when in reality the logs exist. Making it easier for developers, users, and specialists using Groundcover to navigate and get what they need without the help of an experienced person walking them through is very important. This improvement is not about functionality but more about making navigation easier.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ROI has been great as we could launch it in a few months instead of a couple of years, and when you put all the costs together, it is less to have done it than with the open source approach."
"The most useful feature for us, because of some of the issues we had previously, was the simplicity of log integrations. It's much easier with this platform to integrate log sources that might not have standard logging and things like that."
"Scalability is one of Devo's strengths."
"Because of the way Devo works, our onboarding time has shrunk by 50 percent at least."
"The ability to have high performance, high-speed search capability is incredibly important for us. When it comes to doing security analysis, you don't want to be doing is sitting around waiting to get data back while an attacker is sitting on a network, actively attacking it. You need to be able to answer questions quickly. If I see an indicator of attack, I need to be able to rapidly pivot and find data, then analyze it and find more data to answer more questions. You need to be able to do that quickly. If I'm sitting around just waiting to get my first response, then it ends up moving too slow to keep up with the attacker. Devo's speed and performance allows us to query in real-time and keep up with what is actually happening on the network, then respond effectively to events."
"When we show the people who are in charge of getting funding that we saved this number of man-hours, which correlates to this number of dollars, they're more willing to fight to get that funding for the next fiscal year."
"The most powerful feature is the way the data is stored and extracted. The data is always stored in its original format and you can normalize the data after it has been stored."
"One of the biggest features of the UI is that you see the actual code of what you're doing in the graphical user interface, in a little window on the side. Whatever you're doing, you see the code, what's happening. And you can really quickly switch between using the GUI and using the code. That's really useful."
"Groundcover Observability Platform scales effectively with our organization's growth as we add new environments and everything works great, and the migration from our old product went very smoothly, allowing us to deprecate it rather quickly."
"Groundcover Observability Platform has impacted my organization positively as it is the primary way we use observability in our company, so it has a significant impact."
"Troubleshooting is very fast compared to manual investigation or using the other forms of logging that we used to have, and downtime and errors have decreased because we are able to see our performance and workload pods performing better, increase CPU and memory resources as soon as usage goes above the threshold, and make our application more scalable and improve performance metrics, reducing the number of errors in the application by at least 70%."
"We switched to Groundcover Observability Platform primarily because of the difficult query syntax in our previous solution, and we chose Groundcover for their business model as they don't charge based on log storage, they provide the infrastructure, and from a security perspective, the data stays in-house, which wasn't the case with our previous tool."
 

Cons

"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
"I would like to have the ability to create more complex dashboards."
"My opinion on the solution's technical support is not as great as it could be because of the issues I have faced regarding the service management element."
"However, the incident and threat detection is not what we had hoped for."
"Technical support needs to be more direct. For example, when we submit a ticket, the support team will delegate a task to the operations team, for example, or various other teams."
"One improvement area for Devo could be simplifying some configuration and improving the onboarding for new analysts because it is quite complex for fresher or new analysts who are handling Devo."
"There are some issues from an availability and functionality standpoint, meaning the tool is somewhat slow. There were some slow response periods over the past six to nine months, though it has yet to impact us terribly as we are a relatively small shop. We've noticed it, however, so Devo could improve the responsiveness."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
"I would assess the stability and reliability of Groundcover Observability Platform as an eight out of ten; while I haven't experienced issues personally, I am aware they occasionally encounter some challenges."
"I think it would be beneficial to see the body and content of API calls in the traces as a possible improvement."
"Querying data from Groundcover is not easy if you do not have specific information."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have an OEM agreement with Devo. It is very similar to the standard licensing agreement because we are charged in the same way as any other customer, e.g., we use the backroom."
"Devo is a hosted or subscription-based solution, whereas before, we purchased QRadar, so we owned it and just had to pay a maintenance fee. We've encountered this with some other products, too, where we went over to subscription-based. Our thought process is that with subscription based, the provider hosts and maintains the tool, and it's offsite. That comes with some additional fees, but we were able to convince our upper management it was worth the price. We used to pay under 10k a year for maintenance, and now we're paying ten times that. It was a relatively tough sell to our management, but I wonder if we have a choice anymore; this is where the market is."
"I rate the pricing a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"I like the pricing very much. They keep it simple. It is a single price based on data ingested, and they do it on an average. If you get a spike of data that flows in, they will not stick it to you or charge you for that. They are very fair about that."
"It's a per gigabyte cost for ingestion of data. For every gigabyte that you ingest, it's whatever you negotiated your price for. Compared to other contracts that we've had for cloud providers, it's significantly less."
"Our licensing fees are billed annually and per terabyte."
"Devo was very cost-competitive... Devo did come with that 400 days of hot data, and that was not the case with other products."
"It's very competitive. That was also a primary draw for us. Some of the licensing models with solutions like Splunk and Sentinel were attractive upfront, but there were so many micro-charges and services we would've had to add on to make them what we wanted. We had to include things like SOAR and extended capabilities, whereas all those capabilities are completely included with the Devo platform. I haven't seen any additional fee."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
37%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Devo?
The pricing of the product is reasonable if we compare it with other Gartner leading products like Splunk, LogRhythm, Microsoft Sentinel, Google SecOps. Its licensing model is basically on per-day ...
What needs improvement with Devo?
Devo can improve in how its connectors enhance integration with third-party tools. Devo's architecture works by having you deploy a relay server in the data center of the client side and Devo SIEM ...
What is your primary use case for Devo?
I am using Devo myself. Basically, I work at an MSSP, and we provide services to the organization for Security Operation Centers. In our Security Operation Center, we provide the service of SIEM vi...
What needs improvement with Groundcover Observability Platform?
Groundcover Observability Platform is already very vast, and improving it requires proper training for even a software developer to be able to use it. A person in tech needs training to navigate th...
What is your primary use case for Groundcover Observability Platform?
My main use case for Groundcover Observability Platform is for application logs, insights, workload observability, and visibility.
What advice do you have for others considering Groundcover Observability Platform?
Groundcover Observability Platform is a good platform and very good to use. I would rate this review as highly positive.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

United States Air Force, Rubrik, SentinelOne, Critical Start, NHL, Panda Security, Telefonica, CaixaBank, OpenText, IGT, OneMain Financial, SurveyMonkey, FanDuel, H&R Block, Ulta Beauty, Manulife, Moneylion, Chime Bank, Magna International, American Express Global Business Travel
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Devo vs. Groundcover Observability Platform and other solutions. Updated: July 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.