Grafana Loki vs SigNoz
Both are alternatives to Splunk. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Also searched as SigNoz vs Grafana Loki — same comparison, one verdict.
Grafana Loki and SigNoz are closely matched on ownership (86 vs 84) — this one comes down to pricing and to which trade-offs below you can live with.
Grafana Loki
Cost-efficient log aggregation that indexes labels, not full text.
Loki, from Grafana Labs, keeps log storage cheap by indexing only metadata labels instead of full text, and pairs with Grafana for querying and dashboards. It is a lightweight, low-cost way to centralize logs when you don't need Splunk's full SIEM surface.
SigNoz
OpenTelemetry-native logs, traces, and metrics in one app.
SigNoz ingests logs alongside traces and metrics via OpenTelemetry and provides search, dashboards, and alerting. It fits best when your log analysis sits next to application observability rather than dedicated security/SIEM work.
Side by side
10 points of comparison, every one read from a verified field. Green marks the side that wins a row outright. A dash means we do not hold that fact — never that it is zero.
| Grafana Loki | SigNoz | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty ScoreOur transparent 0–100 composite for data ownership and exit cost. | 86 | 84 |
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Local-first data | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT (core) |
| Pricing | Free / self-host; optional Grafana Cloud | Free / self-host; optional managed cloud |
| RAM to run it wellThe figure that actually matters, not the vendor's minimum. | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Realistic running costWhat the box costs each month if you run it yourself. | $20–40/mo plus object storage, against Splunk pricing that is famously per-GB-ingested | $50–90/mo for a mid-size estate, against Datadog APM pricing per host plus per-ingested-GB |
| Setup timeHonest first-install estimate, not the marketing quickstart. | Half a day | Half a day |
| Ongoing maintenanceThe part nobody budgets for. | Moderate. Label hygiene and retention are ongoing. | Moderate. Retention policy and ClickHouse disk headroom are the recurring jobs. |
Grafana Loki edges it on the Sovereignty Score, but the right pick depends on the trade-offs below.
Grafana Loki
Strengths
- +Very cost-efficient storage via label-based indexing
- +Integrates natively with Grafana dashboards you may already run
- +Simpler to operate than a full search cluster
Trade-offs
- −Label-only indexing makes ad-hoc full-text search slower than OpenSearch or Splunk
- −No built-in security-analytics/SIEM layer
- −AGPL-3.0 network copyleft matters if you offer it as a service
SigNoz
Strengths
- +Unifies logs with traces and metrics via OpenTelemetry
- +MIT-licensed core, no field-of-use restrictions
- +No per-GB-ingest billing when self-hosted
Trade-offs
- −Log analytics is younger than OpenSearch's search engine
- −Not a SIEM — no dedicated security-analytics layer
- −ClickHouse-backed stack to operate
Which one fits you
The trade-offs above, turned into a decision. Find the line that describes your team.
Choose Grafana Loki
if a lower exit cost matters more to you than any single feature, and very cost-efficient storage via label-based indexing.
Choose SigNoz
if unifies logs with traces and metrics via OpenTelemetry.
Neither, yet
if both carry a real cost you should weigh first — label-only indexing makes ad-hoc full-text search slower than OpenSearch or Splunk, and log analytics is younger than OpenSearch's search engine. If either of those is a dealbreaker for your team, the shortlist is wrong rather than the choice.
What it takes to run these yourself
Real requirements and honest running costs, not the vendor quickstart.
Grafana Loki vs SigNoz — common questions
Is Grafana Loki a better fit than SigNoz for log management & siem?
It depends on what you are optimising for, and the honest split is this: Grafana Loki scores 86 to SigNoz's 84 on data ownership and exit cost, so it is the safer choice if you care about being able to leave. SigNoz earns its place on a different axis — unifies logs with traces and metrics via OpenTelemetry. Neither is a wrong answer for every team; the table above is the actual comparison.
What happens if we want to switch later?
Grafana Loki keeps its data local or in open formats, so leaving is an export rather than a negotiation. SigNoz is still self-hostable, so the files stay on your server either way — but it is not local-first by design, so check what its export produces before you rely on it.
Can I self-host Grafana Loki or SigNoz?
Both can be self-hosted. The difference is what it costs you in time rather than whether it is possible — see the setup and maintenance rows above.
Are Grafana Loki and SigNoz both alternatives to Splunk?
Yes — both appear in our Splunk comparison, which is why they are worth putting side by side. People usually arrive here already having decided to move off Splunk and now choosing between the two replacements, which is a narrower and much easier question.
More Splunk head-to-heads
Related alternative guides
Facts verified 2026-07-09. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.