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

Elastic Search vs Microsoft FAST 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

Elastic Search
Ranking in Indexing and Search
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (9th), Search as a Service (1st), Vector Databases (3rd)
Microsoft FAST
Ranking in Indexing and Search
8th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Indexing and Search category, the mindshare of Elastic Search is 23.1%, down from 27.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft FAST is 6.5%, down from 6.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Indexing and Search
 

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.
reviewer1466883 - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust solution with good value
Microsoft FAST is quite robust. Our clients are quite happy with it. For other users who already have a solution in place, we recommend Microsoft FAST because it is more compatible and you can organize the solution with Microsoft components. If you are with any other third party, there could be a chance that the required output is not what you would expect. But with Microsoft, it will work better. It is compatible with the older generation systems, so you can offer it. On a scale of one to ten, I would give Microsoft FAST an eight because I'm quite comfortable with it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ability to aggregate log and machine data into a searchable index reduces time to identify and isolate issues for an application. Saves time in triage and incident response by eliminating manual steps to access and parse logs on separate systems, within large infrastructure footprints."
"We had many reasons to implement Elasticsearch for search term solutions. Elasticsearch products provide enterprise landscape support for different areas of the company."
"The observability is the best available because it provides granular insights that identify reasons for defects."
"The solution has good security features. I have been happy with the dashboards and interface."
"You have dashboards, it is visual, there are maps, you can create canvases. It's more visual than anything that I've ever used."
"The most valuable features are the data store and the X-pack extension."
"The most valuable features are the detection and correlation features."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its utility and usefulness."
"Microsoft FAST is quite robust. Our clients are quite happy with it."
 

Cons

"They should improve its documentation. Their official documentation is not very informative. They can also improve their technical support. They don't help you much with the customized stuff. They also need to add more visuals. Currently, they have line charts, bar charts, and things like that, and they can add more types of visuals. They should also improve the alerts. They are not very simple to use and are a bit complex. They could add more options to the alerting system."
"Elasticsearch could improve by honoring Unix environmental variables and not relying only on those provided by Java (e.g. installing plugins over the Unix http proxy)."
"I would like to see more integration for the solution with different platforms."
"Kibana should be more friendly, especially when building dashboards."
"The price could be better. Kibana has some limitations in terms of the tablet to view event logs. I also have a high volume of data. On the initialization part, if you chose Kibana, you'll have some limitations. Kibana was primarily proposed as a log data reviewer to build applications to the viewer log data using Kibana. Then it became a virtualization tool, but it still has limitations from a developer's point of view."
"We have an issue with the volume of data that we can handle."
"While integrating with tools like agents for ingesting data from sources like firewalls is valuable, I believe prioritizing improvements to the core product would be more beneficial."
"An improvement would be to have an interface that allows easier navigation and tracing of logs."
"If there is any change in a system or a configuration or an update, we might face some issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is a free version, and there is also a hosted version for which you have to pay. We're currently using the free version. If things go well, we might go for the paid version."
"ELK has been considered as an alternative to Splunk to reduce licensing costs."
"An X-Pack license is more affordable than Splunk."
"Although the ELK Elasticsearch software is open-source, we buy the hardware."
"​The pricing and license model are clear: node-based model."
"The cost varies based on factors like usage volume, network load, data storage size, and service utilization. If your usage isn't too extensive, the cost will be lower."
"This product is open-source and can be used free of charge."
"The solution is free."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Indexing and Search solutions are best for your needs.
860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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
MS FAST
 

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.
Moffitt Cancer Center, Hitachi Solutions, Manupatra Information Solutions, Unique World, _KODA AUTO a.s., MindTree Ltd, Mississippi Department of Transportation
Find out what your peers are saying about Elastic Search vs. Microsoft FAST and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.