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

Devo vs Logz.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 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

Devo
Ranking in Log Management
25th
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
25th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
IT Operations Analytics (9th), AIOps (18th)
Logz.io
Ranking in Log Management
33rd
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
38th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of Devo is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Logz.io is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Log Management
 

Featured Reviews

Michael Wenn - PeerSpot reviewer
Has cloud-first architecture with SIEM technology to run security operations
When it comes to scale, they're architected quite well. They handle some of the biggest customers globally, with significant throughput on their platform, managing thousands of customers. One of the most impressive aspects of Devo is its customer community. A large majority, over 80 percent of their customers, actively participate on a Devo-specific community page. They're contributing to product development and support, events, and user group information, helping each other out. This high level of engagement is rare and demonstrates both the loyalty of their customer base and the quality of their product. They offer a range of small, medium, and large options to cater to everyone. I sold Devo products while working with them, focusing on enterprise solutions. However, as a small reseller, my customers were typically smaller businesses. I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten.
Derrick Brockel - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It centralizes security management within a business, functioning as a core system for a SOC."
"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"Devo helps us to unlock the full power of our data because they have more than 450 parsers, which means that we can ingest pretty much any type of log data."
"The most valuable feature is that it has native MSSP capabilities and maintains perfect data separation. It does all of that in a very easy-to-manage cloud-based solution."
"The strength of Devo is not only in that it is pretty intuitive, but it gives you the flexibility and creativity to merge feeds. The prime examples would be using the synthesis or union tables that give you phenomenal capabilities... The ability to use a synthesis or union table to combine all those feeds and make heads or tails of what's going on, and link it to go down a thread, is functionality that I hadn't seen before."
"The querying and the log-retention capabilities are pretty powerful. Those provide some of the biggest value-add for us."
"Being able to build and modify dashboards on the fly with Activeboards streamlines my analyst time because my analysts aren't doing it across spreadsheets or five different tools to try to build a timeline out themselves. They can just ingest it all, build a timeline out across all the logging, and all the different information sources in one dashboard. So, it's a huge time saver. It also has the accuracy of being able to look at all those data sources in one view. The log analysis, which would take 40 hours, we can probably get through it in about five to eight hours using Devo."
"The alerting is much better than I anticipated. We don't get as many alerts as I thought we would, but that nobody's fault, it's just the way it is."
"InsightOne is the main reason why we use LogMeIn. This is mostly because of log data that we are pushing tools and logs in general."
"We use the product for log collection and monitoring."
"The tool is simple to setup where it is just plug and play. The tool is reliable and we never had any performance issues."
"The visualizations in Kibana are the most valuable feature. It's much more convenient to have a visualization of logs. We can see status really clearly and very fast, with just a couple of clicks."
"The query mechanism for response codes and application health is valuable."
"The other nice thing about Logz.io is their team. When it comes to onboarding, their support is incredibly proactive. They bring the brand experience from a customer services perspective because their team is always there to help you refine filters and tweak dashboards. That is really a useful thing to have. Their engagement is really supportive."
"We use the tool to track the dev and production environment."
"It is massively useful and great for testing. We can just go, find logs, and attach them easily. It has a very quick lookup. Whereas, before we would have to go, dig around, and find the server that the logs were connected to, then go to the server, download the log, and attach it. Now, we can just go straight to this solution, type in the log ID and server ID, and obtain the information that we want."
 

Cons

"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."
"Devo has a lot of cloud connectors, but they need to do a little bit of work there. They've got good integrations with the public cloud, but there are a lot of cloud SaaS systems that they still need to work with on integrations, such as Salesforce and other SaaS providers where we need to get access logs."
"The Activeboards feature is not as mature regarding the look and feel. Its functionality is mature, but the look and feel is not there. For example, if you have some data sets and are trying to get some graphics, you cannot change anything. There's just one format for the graphics. You cannot change the size of the font, the font itself, etc."
"Some basic reporting mechanisms have room for improvement. Customers can do analysis by building Activeboards, Devo’s name for interactive dashboards. This capability is quite nice, but it is not a reporting engine. Devo does provide mechanisms to allow third-party tools to query data via their API, which is great. However, a lot of folks like or want a reporting engine, per se, and Devo simply doesn't have that. This may or may not be by design."
"Technical support could be better."
"The overall performance of extraction could be a lot faster, but that's a common problem in this space in general. Also, the stock or default alerting and detecting options could definitely be broader and more all-encompassing. The fact that they're not is why we had to write all our own alerts."
"Some third-parties don't have specific API connectors built, so we had to work with Devo to get the logs and parse the data using custom parsers, rather than an out-of-the-box solution."
"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."
"The price can be cheaper and they should have better monitoring."
"The product needs improvement from a filtering perspective."
"The solution needs to improve its data retention. It should be greater than seven days. The product needs to improve its documentation as well."
"Capacity planning could be a little bit of a struggle."
"The solution needs to expand its access control and make it accessible through API."
"I would like granularity on alerting so we can get tentative alerts and major alerts, then break it down between the two."
"When it comes to reducing our troubleshooting time, it depends. When there are no bugs in Logz.io, it reduces troubleshooting by 5 to 10 percent. When there are bugs, it increases our troubleshooting time by 200 percent or more."
"I would like them to improve how they manage releases. Some of our integrations integrate specifically with set versions. Logz.io occasionally releases an update that might break that integration. On one occasion, we found out a little bit too late, then we had to roll it back."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"[Devo was] in the ballpark with at least a couple of the other front-runners that we were looking at. Devo is a good value and, given the quality of the product, I would expect to pay more."
"I rate the pricing a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"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."
"Our licensing fees are billed annually and per terabyte."
"Devo is definitely cheaper than Splunk. There's no doubt about that. The value from Devo is good. It's definitely more valuable to me than QRadar or LogRhythm or any of the old, traditional SIEMs."
"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."
"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."
"Pricing is based on the number of gigabytes of ingestion by volume, and it's on a 30-day average. If you go over one day, that's not a big deal as long as the average is what you expected it to be."
"At the time it was set up, we thought Logz.io was very reasonable for what we were getting in terms of how much time and hosting costs it was saving us, because you don't have to run the servers for it anymore."
"The tool is an open source product."
"You pay for what you need, and that is a good model. They are also quite happy to talk to you about your uses and your use case. They will even go as far as suggesting things that you don't need to do in order to save you money. At one point, I was quite surprised at how cheap it could be if we wanted it to be or how much they would help us manage our costs."
"The product's pricing is cheaper than other solutions."
"The product is a little expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Devo?
Devo has a really good website for creating custom configurations.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Devo?
Compared to Splunk or SentinelOne, it is really expensive. I rate the product’s pricing a nine out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with Devo?
They can improve their AI capabilities. If you look at some integrations like XDR or AI, which add to the platform to correlate situations in events, there are areas for enhancement. For instance, ...
What do you like most about Logz.io?
The query mechanism for response codes and application health is valuable.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Logz.io?
The product is a little expensive. We're pushing 17 TB. It costs us one and a half million dollars a year.
What needs improvement with Logz.io?
Capacity planning could be a little bit of a struggle. The product must add some AI capabilities to learn from previous behaviors. Instead of us setting thresholds, the tool should learn the thresh...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Logz
 

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
Dish Network, The Economist, Forbes, Holler, Kenshoo, OneSpan, Siemens, Sisense, Unity, ZipRecruiter
Find out what your peers are saying about Devo vs. Logz.io and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.