Software · head to head
Datadog Logs vs Fluentd

Datadog Logs
Software
Log Management and Analytics
- From
- $0.1/per GB ingested per month
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only Fluentd has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: Datadog Logs complex, multi-tiered pricing model based on ingestion, indexing, and storage; can become expensive at scale; Fluentd fluentd needs more than 60 MB of memory at runtime, against roughly 450 KB for Fluent Bit
- They diverge on capability: Datadog Logs covers Log ingestion, Fluentd covers Log collection.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Datadog Logs and Fluentd actually diverge.
| Attribute | Datadog Logs | Fluentd |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | $0.1/per GB ingested per month | Free |
| Pricing model | usage-based | open-source |
| Free tier | No | Yes |
| Platforms | Cloud (AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, Oracle Cloud) | Web, Api |
| Founded | 2010 | 2011 |
Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Unknown).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Datadog Logs
- Log ingestion
- Full-text search
- Custom dashboards
- Log-based metrics
Only in Fluentd
- Log collection
- Data parsing
- Filtering and buffering
- Event routing
Both cover
- API
- Webhooks
- REST
- Web support
- Api support
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Datadog Logs
- Centralised log aggregation and analysisnot Fluentd
- Multi-source log correlation with metrics and tracesnot Fluentd
- Root cause analysis and troubleshootingnot Fluentd
- Security monitoring and threat detectionnot Fluentd
Fluentd
- Unified log collection and routing from many sources to many destinationsnot Datadog Logs
- Parsing and transforming log records before forwardingnot Datadog Logs
- Aggregating logs from containers into Elasticsearch, S3 or a SIEMnot Datadog Logs
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Datadog Logs
- Complex, multi-tiered pricing model based on ingestion, indexing, and storage; can become expensive at scale
- Ingestion pricing of $0.10/GB can accumulate rapidly for high-volume logging environments
Fluentd
- Fluentd needs more than 60 MB of memory at runtime, against roughly 450 KB for Fluent Bit
- Fluentd is built as a Ruby gem and depends on other gems, so a Ruby runtime is required
- Its capability comes from over 1,000 external plugins rather than built in functionality, so each added input or output is a separate dependency
- The Fluent Bit documentation states that cloud providers have switched from Fluentd to Fluent Bit for performance and compatibility and calls Fluent Bit the next generation solution
Pricing, plan by plan
Datadog Logs
$0.1/per GB ingested per monthNo published plan breakdown. See the Datadog Logs review.
Fluentd
Free- FreeFree
- Log collection
- Data parsing
- Filtering and buffering
Which should you pick?
Choose Datadog Logs if
- You need log ingestion.
- You work on Cloud (AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, Oracle Cloud).
- You also want full-text search.
Choose Fluentd if
- You need log collection.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Web, Api.
- You also want data parsing.
Questions people ask
- Is Datadog Logs or Fluentd better?
- Neither clearly leads. Datadog Logs starts at $0.1/per GB ingested per month and Fluentd at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Datadog Logs or Fluentd?
- Fluentd has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at $0.1/per GB ingested per month for Datadog Logs and Free for Fluentd.
- Does Datadog Logs or Fluentd run on more platforms?
- Datadog Logs runs on Cloud (AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, Oracle Cloud). Fluentd runs on Web, Api.
- Can I use Fluentd for free?
- Yes. Fluentd has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Datadog Logs starts at $0.1/per GB ingested per month.
- What is Datadog Logs best used for?
- Datadog Logs is most often used for centralised log aggregation and analysis, multi-source log correlation with metrics and traces, root cause analysis and troubleshooting, security monitoring and threat detection. Of those, centralised log aggregation and analysis and multi-source log correlation with metrics and traces are not what Fluentd is typically brought in for.
- What can Datadog Logs do that Fluentd cannot?
- Datadog Logs covers Log ingestion, Full-text search, Custom dashboards, Log-based metrics. Fluentd covers Log collection, Data parsing, Filtering and buffering, Event routing. Both handle API, Webhooks, REST, Web support.
Related pages
More on Datadog Logs
Keep looking
Other head to heads
- Datadog Logs vs Elastic Stack
- Datadog Logs vs New Relic
- Datadog Logs vs Coralogix
- Datadog Logs vs Grafana Loki
- Datadog Logs vs CloudWatch
- Datadog Logs vs Dynatrace
- Datadog Logs vs InfluxDB
- Datadog Logs vs Airbrake
- Datadog Logs vs AppDynamics
- Datadog Logs vs Axiom
- Datadog Logs vs Azure Monitor
- Datadog Logs vs Better Stack
- Datadog Logs vs Bugsnag
- Datadog Logs vs Dynatrace Logs
- Datadog Logs vs Elastic
- Datadog Logs vs Elastic APM
- Datadog Logs vs Elasticsearch Service
- Datadog Logs vs ELK Stack
- Fluentd vs Elastic Stack
- Fluentd vs New Relic
- Fluentd vs Coralogix
- Fluentd vs Grafana Loki
- Fluentd vs CloudWatch
- Fluentd vs Dynatrace
- Fluentd vs InfluxDB
- Fluentd vs Airbrake
- Fluentd vs AppDynamics
- Fluentd vs Axiom
- Fluentd vs Azure Monitor
- Fluentd vs Better Stack
- Fluentd vs Bugsnag
- Fluentd vs Dynatrace Logs
- Fluentd vs Elastic
- Fluentd vs Elastic APM
- Fluentd vs Elasticsearch Service
- Fluentd vs ELK Stack

