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

Devo vs Mezmo comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Devo
Ranking in Log Management
21st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (16th), IT Operations Analytics (7th), AIOps (17th)
Mezmo
Ranking in Log Management
54th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (78th), Observability Pipeline Software (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 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 Mezmo is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Log Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Devo1.4%
Mezmo0.9%
Other97.7%
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.
TO
President and Founder at STILLWATER SUPERCOMPUTING INC
It consolidates all logs into one place and provides required features and functionalities
Every once in a while, our IBM cloud operational implementation gets behind. Sometimes, when we have a customer event, we do not get access to the latest logs for about 30 minutes, particularly for the sites that are heavily utilized. This is clearly not good. It is impossible to do RCA when you can't look at the logs that pertain to the time period in which the event occurred. It could be more of an operational problem than a feature problem. I don't have visibility about whether it is a LogDNA issue or just an operational issue.

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 real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"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."
"Having one integrated tool helped us by removing the multiple teams, multiple pieces of equipment, and multiple software solutions from the equation."
"Devo has positively impacted our organization because we have been using only one tool for our centralized logging systems."
"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."
"Overall, using Devo has saved us time when compared to our previous security solutions, and I estimate that it took us 10 times longer to achieve the same thing without Devo."
"With Devo, we can eliminate swivel chair analysis among tools for a streamlined workflow that gives us the most direct path to the root cause."
"We haven't had anything yet that we couldn't do through LogDNA."
"LogDNA consolidates all logs into one place, which is super valuable."
"With LogDNA, which brings all the logs together in an interleaved stream, it allows us to take a transaction and relate it to other contextual events making the gathering of evidence for auditors and our internal RCA much more productive."
"The solution aggregates all event streams, so that if there are any issues, it's all in the same interface."
 

Cons

"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."
"From our experience, the Devo agent needs some work. They built it on top of OS Query's open-source framework. It seems like it wasn't tuned properly to handle a large volume of Windows event logs. In our experience, there would definitely be some room for improvement. A lot of SIEMs on the market have their own agent infrastructure. I think Devo's working towards that, but I think that it needs some improvement as far as keeping up with high-volume environments."
"However, the incident and threat detection is not what we had hoped for."
"There is room for improvement in the ability to parse different log types. I would go as far as to say the product is deficient in its ability to parse multiple, different log types, including logs from major vendors that are supported by competitors. Additionally, the time that it takes to turn around a supported parser for customers and common log source types, which are generally accepted standards in the industry, is not acceptable. This has impacted customer onboarding and customer relationships for us on multiple fronts."
"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."
"I have not observed a return on investment with Devo in terms of fewer employees needed, money saved, or time saved."
"In terms of return on investment with Devo, I'd say it has been costly due to the need for support and the overtime required for issues experienced at the beginning of the project."
"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."
"No ability to encapsulate a query or a filter, and communicate or share that among the team."
"Every once in a while, our IBM cloud operational implementation gets behind. Sometimes, when we have a customer event, we do not get access to the latest logs for about 30 minutes, particularly for the sites that are heavily utilized. This is clearly not good. It is impossible to RCA when you can't look at the logs that pertain to the time period in which the event occurred. It could be more of an operational problem than a feature problem. I don't have visibility about whether it is a LogDNA issue or just an operational issue."
"Scalability could be improved; we are using it through the IBM cloud deployment and on some of the data centers that are very heavily used, there is a significant lag in the event stream, sometimes 10, 15 minutes behind, which makes the RCA impossible."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Be cautious of metadata inclusion for log types in pricing, as there are some "gotchas" with 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."
"I rate the pricing a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"I'm not involved in the financial aspect, but I think the licensing costs are similar to other solutions. If all the solutions have a similar cost, Devo provides more for the money."
"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."
"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."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
18%
Transportation Company
14%
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise15
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Devo?
In terms of improvements, I think Devo falls short with their support model, as they rely mainly on their support team in Spain. Although they do have a support team in North America, they lack kno...
What is your primary use case for Devo?
Devo is the bank's centralized log management platform that my team and I rely on the most. For centralized log management in our day-to-day work, one of the biggest data users would be our Red Hat...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
LogDNA
 

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
Instacart, Asics, Lime, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about Devo vs. Mezmo and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.