Datadog vs SignalFx for Continuous Monitoring

Posted by UpGuard

Datadog vs. SignalFx

Continuous monitoring is critical for ensuring that IT assets and controls meet business requirements and expectations—constantly assessing and validating them for quality, integrity, and security. This involves not only identifying infrastructure bugs and issues, but also issues with applications and their components. Deteriorating software performance and downtime can be just as devastating to the business as a data breach or security compromise, and is quite often a red flag for cyber attacks in progress. Two leading solutions, Datadog and SignalFx, can help you spot and decipher the smoke signals before your business goes up in flames.

Though both can be roughly categorized as application performance monitoring (APM) tools, Datadog and SignalFx—as well as most monitoring platforms these days—encompass a broad set of capabilities beyond traditional monitoring and alerting. This includes real-time analytics, infrastructure monitoring, elastic cloud monitoring, and more.

Datadog

Datadog is a monitoring solution that utilizes an agent-based architecture to monitor 100s of different OSes, web apps, containers, cloud hosts, and more. In addition, custom agents can be written to address more unique use cases. Starting as a SaaS-based monitoring service for web applications back in 2011, the platform now includes infrastructure management and network monitoring capabilities on top of web/mobile app monitoring.

3-05.png

The Datadog interface. Source: Datadog.com.

Dashboards displaying graphs, charts, and rolling timelines give enterprises the ability to monitor their cloud infrastructures for efficiency and performance visually.

SignalFx

Previously known as SignalFuse, SignalFx came out of stealth mode last year with the announcement of its distributed application / infrastructure monitoring platform. Its pedigree is worth noting: co-founder Phillip Liu's work as a software engineer at then rapidly-growing social network Facebook was instrumental in his subsequent company's monitoring solution. Working on a team developing systems management tools at-scale to support the social network's rapidly expanding distributed architecture, Liu was able to carry much of that experience forward to alleviate similar issues faced by today's digital enterprises.

SignalFx-Screenshot1.pngThe SignalFx UI. Source: Signalfx.com.

Like Datadog, SignalFx's user interface is dashboard-driven and chock full of charts/graphs for analyzing correlating, and comparing performance metrics and events.

Side-by-Side Scoring: Datadog vs. SignalFx

1. Capability Set

Both monitoring platforms offer up powerful metrics in a streamlined dashboard. Datadog, however, offers some extended capabilites like the ability to collaborate on events and outages in real-time—a feature highly useful for analyzing an issue's audit trail to inform remediation efforts.

Capability Set

Datadog score_5.png
SignalFx score_4.png

2. Ease of Use

Both monitoring platforms are straightforward, intuitive SaaS apps that feature quick dashboard creation capabilities and easy-to-configure options and data filters. Datadog, however, requires some command line scripting for its Windows/Mac installs and its agent installations have been known to be problematic upon setup.

Ease of Use

Datadog score_5.png
SignalFx score_4.png

3. Community Support

Datadog is highly active in its community-building efforts and maintains a repository of APIs, libraries, and community contributions in support of its platform—as well as an active GitHub account. SignalFx also maintains an active GitHub account but doesn't have as many community support resources as Datadog.

Datadog score_4.png
SignalFx score_5.png

4. Release Rate

Both Datadog and SignalFx are born-in-the-cloud, continuously updated SaaS applications—in fact, they were designed to monitor SaaS offerings like themselves. Despite being founded in 2011, Datadog launched its first product in 2013; as mentioned earlier, SignalFx came out of stealth mode in 2015.

Release Rate

Datadog score_760.png
SignalFx score_570-2-1.png

5. Pricing and Support

Both monitoring platforms are reasonably priced with a low barrier to entry—Datadog's lowest paid plan is $15/host per month for up to 500 hosts, while SignalFx comes out to about $15/server per month, billed annually. Both also offer 14-day free trials for users to demo their platforms before purchasing, as well as comprehensive support options with free/paid options for online and phone support.

 

 

Pricing and Support

Datadog score_570-2-1.png
SignalFx

score_570-2-1.png

6. API and Extensibility

Datadog's REST API make it easy to get data in and out of the platform; similarly, SignalFx's HTTP API can be used for sending data to the platform and manipulating metadata; additionally, it provides client libraries for Node.js, Python, Ruby, and Go.

API and Extensibility

Datadog score_570-2-1.png
SignalFx score_570-2-1.png

7. 3rd Party Integrations

Datadog features over 100 integrations: VictorOps, Bitium, Slack, PagerDuty, Amazon, Docker, and more. That said, SignalFx—with its impressive set of integrations—is not to be outdone in this category. The platform supports a myriad of vendors and 3rd party solutions, from Mesos and AWS to Okta and Slack.

3rd Party Integrations

Datadog score_570.png
SignalFx score_570.png

8. Companies that Use It

Though SignalFx and Datadog are both in use by prominent organizations, the latter seems to command more enterprise attention—with Adobe, Samsung, Facebook, HP Cloud Services, Electronic Arts, and Spotify as marquee customers, among others. SignalFx is popular among prominent upstarts like Sunrun, Yelp, Onshape, Tapjoy, and Zenefits, to name a few.

Companies that Use It

Datadog score_570.png
SignalFx score_570.png

9. Learning Curve

As modern SaaS-based platforms, both platforms are designed to move users quickly from account setup to monitoring their entire infrastructure and application stack. That said, Datadog—with more time on the market—certainly has more water under the bridge when it comes to refinements for a smoother learning curve.

Learning Curve

Datadog score_570.png
SignalFx score_570.png

10. CSTAR SCORE

Datadog's website perimeter and email security are good per UpGuard's CSTAR scoring system; SignalFx also scores well in this category, slightly higher than Datadog.

CSTAR Score

Datadog score_datadog-2.png
SignalFx score_signalfx.png

 

Scoreboard and Summary

  Datadog SignalFx
Capability Set score_570.png score_570.png
Ease of Use score_570.png score_570.png
Community Support score_570.png score_570.png
Release Rate score_570.png score_570.png
Pricing and Support score_570.png score_570.png
API and Extensibility score_570.png score_570.png
3rd Party Integrations score_570.png score_570.png
Companies that Use It score_570.png score_570.png
Learning Curve score_570.png score_570.png
CSTAR Score score_datadog-2.png score_signalfx.png
Total  4.8 out of 5  4.6 out of 5

In short, with more time on the market and a large footprint in the enterprise, Datadog may be more ideal for large firms with both on-premise and cloud-based infrastructures. On the other hand, SaaS startups with modern, highly-distributed apps and complex environments will find a complementary monitoring platform in SignalFx. Both options are reasonably priced, offer a myriad of integrations, and will scale with your organization's needs. 

Learn More: UpGuard + DevOps

More Articles

How CSTAR Works

All the information needed to perform a CSTAR assessment is bundled into the UpGuard platform. Learn more about CSTAR.
Read Article >

What's In the Website Risk Grader?

The UpGuard Website Risk Grader provides a low friction way to get an initial assessment of a business' risk profile.
Read Article >

Understanding Risk in the 21st Century

And as we enter 2016, the risk of data breaches in particular threatens to hamper business innovation.
Read Article 

 
 

Topics: SaaS, Cloud Computing, monitoring

Blog

  Featured Download – The DevOps Toolchain eBook
UpGuard customers