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

Elastic Search vs Qdrant 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 Vector Databases
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Indexing and Search (1st), Cloud Data Integration (6th), Search as a Service (1st)
Qdrant
Ranking in Vector Databases
4th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Open Source Databases (11th), AI Data Analysis (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Vector Databases category, the mindshare of Elastic Search is 4.0%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qdrant is 7.6%, up from 7.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vector Databases Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Elastic Search4.0%
Qdrant7.6%
Other88.4%
Vector Databases
 

Featured Reviews

Anurag Pal - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Search and aggregations have transformed how I manage and visualize complex real estate data
Elastic Search consumes lots of memory. You have to provide the heap size a lot if you want the best out of it. The major problem is when a company wants to use Elastic Search but it is at a startup stage. At a startup stage, there is a lot of funds to consider. However, their use case is that they have to use a pretty significant amount of data. For that, it is very expensive. For example, if you take OLTP-based databases in the current scenario, such as ClickHouse or Iceberg, you can do it on 4GB RAM also. Elastic Search is for analytical records. You have to do the analytics on it. According to me, as far as I have seen, people will start moving from Elastic Search sooner or later. Why? Because it is expensive. Another thing is that there is an open source available for that, such as ClickHouse. Around 2014 and 2012, there was only one competitor at that time, which was Solr. But now, not only is Solr there, but you can take ClickHouse and you have Iceberg also. How are we going to compete with them? There is also a fork of Elastic Search that is OpenSearch. As far as I have seen in lots of articles I am reading, users are using it as the ELK stack for logs and analyzing logs. That is not the exact use case. It can do more than that if used correctly. But as it involves lots of cost, people are shifting from Elastic Search to other sources. When I am talking about pricing, it is not only the server pricing. It is the amount of memory it is using. The pricing is basically the heap Java, which is taking memory. That is the major problem happening here. If we have to run an MVP, a client comes to me and says, "Anurag, we need to do a proof of concept. Can we do it if I can pay a 4GB or 16GB expense?" How can I suggest to them that a minimum of 16GB is needed for Elastic Search so that your proof of concept will be proved? In that case, what I have to suggest from the beginning is to go with Cassandra or at the initial stage, go with PostgreSQL. The problem is the memory it is taking. That is the only thing.
reviewer2811174 - PeerSpot reviewer
AI Developer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Vector search has transformed support workflows and drives faster, more accurate responses
Qdrant can be improved in several ways. A dashboard or UI for re-indexing large collections without downtime and performance degradation would be valuable. The ecosystem around managed backups and cross-region replication could be more seamless for global deployments. Built-in analytics or observability tooling, such as a query performance dashboard and index health monitor, would reduce reliance on external tools. Tighter integration with popular orchestration frameworks like LangChain and LlamaIndex out of the box and more intuitive documentation would be very helpful. Developers need parameters for advanced fine-tuning, such as HNSW settings, and documentation could be clearer. For people without much experience in AI frameworks or vector databases, easier documentation would be helpful. At least the setup part could be simpler. These are some negatives I am observing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is quite scalable and this is one of its advantages."
"A good use case is saving metadata of your systems for data cataloging. Various systems, like those opened in metadata and similar applications, use Elasticsearch to store their text data."
"It helps us to analyse the logs based on the location, user, and other log parameters."
"We had many reasons to implement Elasticsearch for search term solutions. Elasticsearch products provide enterprise landscape support for different areas of the company."
"The special text processing features in this solution are very important for me."
"The most valuable features are its user-friendly interface and seamless navigation."
"The initial setup is very easy for small environments."
"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 analytics with Elastic benefits us due to the huge traffic volume in our organization, which reaches up to 60,000 requests per second. With logs of approximately 25 GB per day, manually analyzing traffic behavior, payloads, headers, user agents, and other details is impractical."
"Due to its quantization ability, we were able to store the same amount of data in less space, which reduced our cloud bills by 30%."
"Using Qdrant's hybrid search capability has improved my search results."
"Due to its quantization ability, we were able to store the same amount of data in less space, which reduced our cloud bills by 30%."
 

Cons

"I would like to see more integration for the solution with different platforms."
"It would be useful to include an assistant into Kibana for recommendations, advice, tutorials, or things that can help improve my daily work with Elastic Search."
"The one area that can use improvement is the automapping of fields."
"I found an issue with Elasticsearch in terms of aggregation. They are good, yet the rules written for this are not really good."
"We'd like more user-friendly integrations."
"The most significant issue I find with Elastic Search is that it gets out of sync, and this has happened in both cases where I have implemented it."
"I don't see improvements at the moment. The current setup is working well for me, and I'm satisfied with it. Integrating with different platforms is also fine, and I'm not recommending any changes or enhancements right now."
"The setup is somewhat complicated due to multiple dependencies and relations with different systems."
"Qdrant can be improved in several ways."
"Qdrant can be improved in several ways."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the free version for some logs, but not extensive use."
"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."
"The price of Elasticsearch is fair. It is a more expensive solution, like QRadar. The price for Elasticsearch is not much more than other solutions we have."
"The tool is not expensive. Its licensing costs are yearly."
"The version of Elastic Enterprise Search I am using is open source which is free. The pricing model should improve for the enterprise version because it is very expensive."
"We are using the free version and intend to upgrade."
"The solution is not expensive because users have the option of choosing the managed or the subscription model."
"It can be expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vector Databases solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business38
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise45
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?
On the subject of pricing, Elastic Search is very cost-efficient. You can host it on-premises, which would incur zero cost, or take it as a SaaS-based service, where the expenses remain minimal.
What needs improvement with ELK Elasticsearch?
From the UI point of view, we are using most probably Kibana, and I think they can do much better than that. That is something they can fine-tune a little bit, and then it will definitely be a good...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qdrant?
Using Qdrant is free. We house it and have a VM where we just installed it on the VM.
What needs improvement with Qdrant?
I should check if real-time data updates in Qdrant have helped improve my models, as I don't even know they have that feature. A lot of our work is agentic right now, and we have also segmented the...
What is your primary use case for Qdrant?
My primary use cases for Qdrant are legal and educational.
 

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.
1. Airbnb 2. Amazon 3. Apple 4. BMW 5.Cisco 6. CocaCola 7. Dell 8. Disney 9. Google 10. HP 11. IBM 12. Intel 13. JPMorgan Chase 14. Kraft Heinz 15. L'Oreal 16. McDonalds 17. Merck 18. Microsoft 19. Nike20. Oracle 21. PG 22. PepsiCo 23. Procter and Gamble 24. Samsung 25. Shell 26. Sony 27. Toyota 28. Visa 29. Walmart 30. WeWork
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Elastic, Redis and others in Vector Databases. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.