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

Grafana vs Monte Carlo 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

Grafana
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (6th)
Monte Carlo
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Data Observability (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

Grafana and Monte Carlo aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Grafana is designed for Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability and holds a mindshare of 6.0%, down 6.2% compared to last year.
Monte Carlo, on the other hand, focuses on Data Observability, holds 35.0% mindshare, down 39.4% since last year.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
Data Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Vikash-Agarwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Displays data visually from multiple sources while integrating seamlessly with existing systems
Grafana provides a user-friendly interface for viewing infrastructure metrics through dashboards. It integrates with Prometheus to pull data and offers a straightforward setup process. Users can monitor metrics with greater ease, and the tool aids in quickly identifying issues by providing a visual representation of data. Grafana's integration capability is straightforward, which facilitates building dashboards as needed.
PR
Provides centralized data observability features and has an easy-to-use user interface.
The product's initial setup is in a daily improvement stage, deploying new plugins for upstream and downstream resources. It takes 25 minutes to complete. The process involves integrating with third-party services for Single Sign-On (SSO). It requires only one executive for maintenance as it has easy-to-use navigation and user interface.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Grafana saves us hours compared to DataDog."
"Compatibility with Prometheus databases and the Spring Boot application make it the first choice when moving toward an SRE model."
"What I found most valuable in Grafana is that it has a lot of integrations and features that I need for data processing and visualization."
"The most valuable thing was that it had a good visualization tool."
"Collaboration: Shares data and dashboards across teams."
"Grafana provides a user-friendly interface for viewing infrastructure metrics through dashboards."
"The dashboards are the most valuable features."
"I find Grafana beneficial due to its numerous plugins."
"It makes organizing work easier based on its relevance to specific projects and teams."
 

Cons

"The formatting could be better."
"It's difficult to see the trends on the graph when the range is too long."
"Setting up alerts via Grafana is a bit complicated, and alerting needs to improve."
"All the features are complicated."
"Writing queries can be a bit difficult because the syntax must be maintained."
"Lacks event management which affects our DevOps people."
"The documentation or training provided by Grafana is limited compared to its competitors, like Splunk."
"I have a problem with Grafana in the area of documentation."
"For anomaly detection, the product provides only the last three weeks of data, while some competitors can analyze a more extended data history."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the open-source license."
"I use the open source model so it is free."
"You need to purchase the solution's license for its commercial use."
"My company uses the open-source version of Grafana, so it's free."
"We use the open-source version of Grafana."
"For me, Grafana is a cheap tool because I don't have to spend much time learning the product since it is a simple solution."
"It's free of cost; it operates as an open-source tool."
"I give the price an eight out of ten."
"The product has moderate pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Grafana?
The product's initial setup phase was very easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Grafana?
The costs associated with using Grafana are somewhere in the ten thousands because we are able to control the logs in a more efficient way to reduce it. That is pretty much great for us.
What needs improvement with Grafana?
The whole AI capability would be useful for Grafana in the future, and while I don't think we're mature yet, I would want to see improvements, especially in the tracing part, where following differ...
What do you like most about Monte Carlo?
It makes organizing work easier based on its relevance to specific projects and teams.
What needs improvement with Monte Carlo?
For anomaly detection, the product provides only the last three weeks of data, while some competitors can analyze a more extended data history. This feature needs improvement. Its price could be a ...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, Adobe, Optum, Sky, Nvidia, Roblox, Wells Fargo, BlackRock, Informatica, Maersk, Daimler Truck, SNCF, Atlassian, DHL, SAP, JPMorgan Chase, Cisco, Citi and many others.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. Updated: August 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.