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

Elastic Search vs WhereScape RED 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.4
Elastic Search offers high ROI, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness, with significant time-saving and security benefits despite some licensing costs.
Sentiment score
7.0
WhereScape RED offers varied returns, with some users experiencing quick ROI, efficient development, and substantial gains.
The main benefits observed from using Elastic Search include improvements in operational efficiency, along with cost, time, and resource savings.
It is stable, and we do not encounter critical issues like server downtime, which could result in data loss.
We have not purchased any licensed products, and our use of Elastic Search is purely open-source, contributing positively to our ROI.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.5
Elastic Search's customer service is praised for responsiveness and knowledge, but complex issue support may require improvement.
Sentiment score
8.3
Customer service is often excellent and prompt, although some feel support wanes post-purchase and seems money-driven.
I would rate technical support from Elastic Search as three out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Elastic Search is scalable and integrates well, but challenges exist with large datasets and disaster recovery under rapid scaling.
Sentiment score
6.6
WhereScape RED efficiently scales with large data, improves ETL processing, and enhances speeds using ELT and SQL features.
I would rate its scalability a ten.
I can actually add more storage and memory because I host it in the cloud.
I would rate the scalability of Elasticsearch as an eight.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Elastic Search is stable and reliable, though version updates and data management can affect performance under stress.
Sentiment score
6.6
WhereScape RED's stability varies; it's praised for maturity and speed, yet some report resource and debugging challenges.
It was consistent and reliable in our usage.
The data transfer sometimes exceeded the bandwidth limits without proper notification, which caused issues.
 

Room For Improvement

Elastic Search needs improvements in security, scalability, usability, stability, integration, support, and enhanced features for a better user experience.
WhereScape RED suffers from scalability issues, lacking performance efficiency, enhanced documentation, better GUI, and improved support for multi-database environments.
The consistency and stability of Elasticsearch are commendable, and they should keep up the good work.
The architecture of Elastic Search could be improved as it is complicated for most general users to build up the environment and maintain the cluster.
This can create problems for new developers because they have to quickly switch to another version.
 

Setup Cost

Elastic Search's free open-source version can incur back-end costs for advanced features, expertise, and premium support.
WhereScape RED's flexible developer-based licensing and native SQL code provide cost-effective, vendor-independent data warehousing solutions with quick ROI potential.
We used the open-source version of Elasticsearch, which was free.
 

Valuable Features

Elastic Search is valued for scalability, fast indexing, powerful analysis, security features, cloud readiness, and strong community support.
WhereScape RED streamlines data warehousing with automation, agile support, user-friendly interface, and compatibility with leading methodologies.
Elastic Search makes handling large data volumes efficient and supports complex search operations.
The most valuable feature of Elasticsearch was the quick search capability, allowing us to search by any criteria needed.
I appreciate the indexing capabilities and the speed of indexing in their product, which demonstrates how quickly logs are collected and stored.
 

Categories and Ranking

Elastic Search
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Indexing and Search (1st), Cloud Data Integration (9th), Search as a Service (1st), Vector Databases (3rd)
WhereScape RED
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (45th)
 

Featured Reviews

Anand_Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Captures data from all other sources and becomes a MOM aka monitoring of monitors
Scalability and ROI are the areas they have to improve. Their license terms are based on the number of cores. If you increase the number of cores, it becomes very difficult to manage at a large scale. For example, if I have a $3 million project, I won't sell it because if we're dealing with a 10 TB or 50 TB system, there are a lot of systems and applications to monitor, and I have to make an MOM (Mean of Max) for everything. This is because of the cost impact. Also, when you have horizontal scaling, it's like a multi-story building with only one elevator. You have to run around, and it's not efficient. Even the smallest task becomes difficult. That's the problem with horizontal scaling. They need to improve this because if they increase the cores and adjust the licensing accordingly, it would make more sense.
reviewer1618884 - PeerSpot reviewer
Quick to set up, flexible, and stable
The scheduling part I don't like due to the fact that it allows you to schedule as a parent and child and other things, however, the error trackability has to be a little more user-friendly. It's also not user-friendly in the sense that it loads all the jobs and there are not enough filters so that it doesn't need to load everything. If the job fails, you don't get any type of alert or email. It would be ideal if there was some sort of automated alert message. Technical support isn't the best. It would be ideal if we understood how to do it in a card exception regarding exclusion, where the card is captured separately rather than filling the whole process on the data inbound side. Certain workloads like this are organized in such a way where you seem to be doubling the work as opposed to streamlining the process.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Insurance Company
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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?
We used the open-source version of Elasticsearch, which was free.
What needs improvement with ELK Elasticsearch?
It would be useful if a feature for renaming indices could be added without affecting the performance of other features. However, overall, the consistency and stability of Elasticsearch are already...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Elastic Enterprise Search, Swiftype, Elastic Cloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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.
British American Tobacco, Cornell University, Allianz Benelux, Finnair, Solarwinds and many more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Elastic Search vs. WhereScape RED and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.