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

Grafana Loki vs Logz.io 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
1.0
Companies gain significant ROI with Grafana Loki's quick setup, cost-effectiveness, and efficiency in resolving issues, enhancing operational insights.
Sentiment score
7.1
Logz.io improved monitoring efficiency, reduced costs, streamlined operations, enhanced analytics, and increased user satisfaction, boosting productivity and savings.
Loki leads to significant cost savings by reducing server downtime and aiding engineers in prompt issue resolution.
Manager Director at Earth
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.2
Grafana Loki support is praised, but many prefer community resources and forums over official channels for problem-solving.
Sentiment score
1.0
Customers appreciate Logz.io's proactive onboarding, helpful filters, and dashboards but desire more accessible technical support and quicker follow-up.
We have not had to open any tickets yet, as we solve issues through forums and wikis.
Manager Director at Earth
I usually do not use official support; I typically rely on community blogs and forums for support of Grafana Loki.
Senior System Engineer at Novell
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.5
Grafana Loki is praised for its scalability, effectively managing diverse user bases and handling extensive log data seamlessly.
Sentiment score
6.0
Logz.io's scalability is praised for handling data efficiently, accommodating team sizes, and maintaining performance despite minor log event issues.
Loki offers great scalability, allowing us to manage and compress logs extensively.
Manager Director at Earth
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Grafana Loki is stable and reliable, though some report issues like outdated authentication and log retrieval difficulties.
Sentiment score
7.2
Logz.io is highly rated for stability, with reliable performance, prompt issue resolution, and effective support and notifications.
 

Room For Improvement

Grafana Loki needs improved usability, integration, and features like customizable reports, better UI, security, and machine learning analytics.
Logz.io requires release management, better alerting, customer update control, AI-based capacity planning, and improved documentation with affordable pricing.
Improvements could be made in the enablement of the product, addressing the complexity of implementing these tools.
Regional Associate & Engineer at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It would be beneficial if Loki could directly access Windows Server logs or events directly from the servers.
Manager Director at Earth
 

Setup Cost

Grafana Loki's open-source and affordable cloud options make it appealing to cost-conscious enterprises seeking scalable logging solutions.
Enterprise users value Logz.io's transparent pricing, cost-effectiveness, and flexibility despite higher costs for large data volumes.
The cloud version is competitively priced compared to other market solutions.
Manager Director at Earth
Since it is an open source tool, there are no charges or fees.
Senior System Engineer at Novell
 

Valuable Features

Grafana Loki offers cost-effective log management, strong integration, and user-friendly features, ideal for Kubernetes and real-time metrics.
Logz.io offers auto-scaling, AI Insights, log analysis, open-source tech, seamless integration, cost-efficiency, flexible billing, and optimized dashboards.
It provides a clear picture about the state of the system and gives needed information for taking action and quickly fixing problems.
Senior System Engineer at Novell
Grafana Loki is notably cost-effective.
Regional Associate & Engineer at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
The most valuable part of Loki is the ability to filter logs by keywords and devices.
Manager Director at Earth
 

Categories and Ranking

Grafana Loki
Ranking in Log Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Logz.io
Ranking in Log Management
37th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.0
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (46th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of Grafana Loki is 6.3%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Logz.io is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Log Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Grafana Loki6.3%
Logz.io0.7%
Other93.0%
Log Management
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2350791 - PeerSpot reviewer
Regional Associate & Engineer at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Offers cost-effective log management with strong correlation features across observability tools
Grafana Loki's open-source capability is a significant benefit. Grafana has invested in making their enterprise tools competitive with other APM tools, facilitating cross-correlation with Mimir and Tempo for metrics and tracing. The tool offers good search functionality, and its on-premises capability is advantageous. The indexing performance is strong, making it a robust log management tool. Grafana Loki is notably cost-effective.
Derrick Brockel - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager of Operations at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
The solution is a consistent logging platform that provides excellent query mechanisms
We can query a lot of data points and build dashboards. The vendor is good at adjusting their models. Most companies want us to forecast our yearly use and pay it upfront on day one. With Logz.io, we commit to use 14 TB in a year. However, they measure us every month and give us a monthly bill. Depending on our monthly usage, we pay for 14 TB divided by 12 months or a little extra. It's a little bit more like AWS. Other solutions do not do it. They want their money upfront. We really like the dashboards. We have 36 sub-accounts. Each sub-account is an app, and we could put restrictions on that app. Previously, there were capacity restrictions on the sub-accounts. If we have a sub-account of 1 TB and use only 100 GB, we waste 900 GB that day. We could not share it between sub-accounts. Now, they provide an overhead volume. We do a reserve, and any sub-account could use anything over the reserve. It utilizes our footprint better.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.
880,435 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

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?
Improvements could be made in the enablement of the product, addressing the complexity of implementing these tools.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Logz
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Dish Network, The Economist, Forbes, Holler, Kenshoo, OneSpan, Siemens, Sisense, Unity, ZipRecruiter
Find out what your peers are saying about Grafana Loki vs. Logz.io and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
880,435 professionals have used our research since 2012.