Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Solr
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Apache Solr is an open-source enterprise search server.N/A
Elasticsearch
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Elasticsearch is an enterprise search tool from Elastic in Mountain View, California.
$16
per month
Google Search Console
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Google Search Console is a search engine optimization software solution offered by Google.N/A
Pricing
Apache SolrElasticsearchGoogle Search Console
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Standard
$16.00
per month
Gold
$19.00
per month
Platinum
$22.00
per month
Enterprise
Contact Sales
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache SolrElasticsearchGoogle Search Console
Free Trial
NoNoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache SolrElasticsearchGoogle Search Console
Considered Multiple Products
Apache Solr
Chose Apache Solr
Some people on my team tried MondoDB and had several problems (don't remember which ones).

Elasticsearch would be a good choice but we didn't have it in our minds when we made the choice.
Chose Apache Solr
Between Solr and ElasticSearch, there is a constant struggle to pick the best one. ElasticSearch is part of ELK and ties in well with LogStash and Kibana which makes it great for logs and big data stuff. Add some logs and see which works best for your particular access methods …
Chose Apache Solr
We tryed to promote Redis as cache solution for application, in order to replace Apache Solr, but it won't go well. Redis best pratices requires some more computer resources. With Elastic Search, the use case was another, and don't compete with Apache Solr.
Chose Apache Solr
Apache Solr in general stacks up very well to its competitors, it provides much of the same features and performance and has the benefits of being an open-source project with an active contributor base that works consistently and improves the platform. Depending on your setup …
Elasticsearch
Chose Elasticsearch
Apache Solr is the closest competitor to ElasticSearch from a search engine perspective. ElasticSearch is simple and streamlined in it's configuration. When taken as a whole, Apache Solr is more robust as a storage engine from a developer perspective, ElasticSearch has the …
Chose Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch is the most well-known and supported free data platform that we identified. We are taking advantage of community knowledge and practices.
In terms of flexibility and breadth of use cases no other competitor came close to Elasticsearch.
We've tried Solr in the past …
Chose Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch and Solr are both based on Lucene, but the user community for Elasticsearch is much stronger, and setting up a cluster is easier. Splunk is very well suited for Log indexing and searching but is not nearly as flexible as Elasticsearch. Couchbase is a great NoSQL …
Chose Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch is very well packed in a broad set of features, ranging from customization capabilities to security and add-ons, and also comes with a great visualization tool named Kibana. Most of the competitors are strong in some of these areas, but I know of no other that's …
Chose Elasticsearch
Almost no one uses Solr anymore--most have migrated to Elasticsearch. I've never tried it myself but I heard Solr is much more difficult to configure and because it doesn't use a REST API, it locks you into Java and XML. XML--ick!
Lucene: Elasticsearch is built using Lucene …
Chose Elasticsearch
All database systems have things they are good at, and things they aren't as good at. Riak/SOLR is great as a K/V store, but SOLR cannot handle requests as fast as ElasticSearch. In fact, SOLR is the reason we had to migrate to ElasticSearch.
Redis is great at SET operations …
Chose Elasticsearch
When we first evaluated Elasticsearch, we compared it with alternatives like traditional RDBMS products (Postgres, MySQL) as well as other noSQL solutions like Cassandra & MongoDB. For our use case, Elasticsearch delivered on two fronts. First, we got a world-class search …
Chose Elasticsearch
We found Elasticsearch to be the fastest in querying text based data, allowing us to significantly speed up our APIs.
Chose Elasticsearch
NEST library is excellent, excellent performance, and scalability (we used a cluster of 2 nodes, and most the queries completed in ms, some may take up to 2s.
Chose Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch is widely popular and it's mostly free. Its ecosystem, ability to scale, ease to set up, integration with other systems, highly usable API make it really great compared to its competition.
Chose Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch is DevOps friendly; it is easy for installation and management of a node/cluster. It is very friendly for developers by providing the REST API out of the box, reducing the development time.
Chose Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch is based off of Apache Lucene. You get the same power as well as a JSON response. REST API is simple and easy to understand. Other options include XML responses which is much more complicated to parse at times.
Chose Elasticsearch
For our application, ElasticSearch fulfilled all the criteria we were looking for. Something that's easy to scale and flexible. I think ElasticSearch works better that Solr with modern real-time search applications. Also, ElasticSearch is easy to integrate with. ElasticSearch …
Chose Elasticsearch
Solr is the only other alternative product I've used. Elasticsearch in comparison is a much better product. The query language in elasticsearch along with the cluster management and sharding makes Elasticsearch a clear winner.
Chose Elasticsearch
We have used Solr. Elastic Search aggregations is what made us move to elastic search initially.
Chose Elasticsearch
Ability to support JSON queries, Percolator, ease to set up and custom routing were some of the reasons why we decided to use Elasticsearch instead of Solr.
Google Search Console

No answer on this topic

Features
Apache SolrElasticsearchGoogle Search Console
SEO
Comparison of SEO features of Product A and Product B
Apache Solr
-
Ratings
Elasticsearch
-
Ratings
Google Search Console
4.9
56 Ratings
44% below category average
Keyword analysis00 Ratings00 Ratings7.848 Ratings
Backlink management00 Ratings00 Ratings5.744 Ratings
SERP ranking tracking00 Ratings00 Ratings6.646 Ratings
Page grader00 Ratings00 Ratings3.833 Ratings
Competitive analysis00 Ratings00 Ratings1.418 Ratings
Site audit / diagnostics00 Ratings00 Ratings7.748 Ratings
Site recommendations00 Ratings00 Ratings5.444 Ratings
Task management00 Ratings00 Ratings1.019 Ratings
SEO Channels
Comparison of SEO Channels features of Product A and Product B
Apache Solr
-
Ratings
Elasticsearch
-
Ratings
Google Search Console
7.2
53 Ratings
5% below category average
Local SEO00 Ratings00 Ratings5.837 Ratings
Social SEO00 Ratings00 Ratings8.019 Ratings
Mobile SEO00 Ratings00 Ratings7.549 Ratings
Global SEO00 Ratings00 Ratings7.743 Ratings
SEO Platform & Account Management
Comparison of SEO Platform & Account Management features of Product A and Product B
Apache Solr
-
Ratings
Elasticsearch
-
Ratings
Google Search Console
8.1
53 Ratings
4% below category average
Multi-domain support00 Ratings00 Ratings8.047 Ratings
Integration with web analytics tools00 Ratings00 Ratings8.150 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache SolrElasticsearchGoogle Search Console
Small Businesses
Yext
Yext
Score 8.9 out of 10
Yext
Yext
Score 8.9 out of 10
Nozzle
Nozzle
Score 10.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Guru
Guru
Score 9.6 out of 10
Guru
Guru
Score 9.6 out of 10
Advanced Web Ranking
Advanced Web Ranking
Score 8.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Guru
Guru
Score 9.6 out of 10
Guru
Guru
Score 9.6 out of 10
Conductor
Conductor
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache SolrElasticsearchGoogle Search Console
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(11 ratings)
9.0
(48 ratings)
9.3
(54 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(1 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
9.1
(6 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.8
(9 ratings)
6.1
(8 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache SolrElasticsearchGoogle Search Console
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Solr spins up nicely and works effectively for small enterprise environments providing helpful mechanisms for fuzzy searches and facetted searching. For larger enterprises with complex business solutions you'll find the need to hire an expert Solr engineer to optimize the powerful platform to your needs. Internationalization is tricky with Solr and many hosting solutions may limit you to a latin character set.
Read full review
Elastic
Elasticsearch is a really scalable solution that can fit a lot of needs, but the bigger and/or those needs become, the more understanding & infrastructure you will need for your instance to be running correctly. Elasticsearch is not problem-free - you can get yourself in a lot of trouble if you are not following good practices and/or if are not managing the cluster correctly. Licensing is a big decision point here as Elasticsearch is a middleware component - be sure to read the licensing agreement of the version you want to try before you commit to it. Same goes for long-term support - be sure to keep yourself in the know for this aspect you may end up stuck with an unpatched version for years.
Read full review
Google
It's suited for all use cases, but for big companies, the data might be crippling, so an add-on tool to analyse the data would be a good companion for GSC to solve this issue. Therefore, I think it's suited for any use case with some add-ons and companions needed for analysis.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Easy to get started with Apache Solr. Whether it is tackling a setup issue or trying to learn some of the more advanced features, there are plenty of resources to help you out and get you going.
  • Performance. Apache Solr allows for a lot of custom tuning (if needed) and provides great out of the box performance for searching on large data sets.
  • Maintenance. After setting up Solr in a production environment there are plenty of tools provided to help you maintain and update your application. Apache Solr comes with great fault tolerance built in and has proven to be very reliable.
Read full review
Elastic
  • As I mentioned before, Elasticsearch's flexible data model is unparalleled. You can nest fields as deeply as you want, have as many fields as you want, but whatever you want in those fields (as long as it stays the same type), and all of it will be searchable and you don't need to even declare a schema beforehand!
  • Elastic, the company behind Elasticsearch, is super strong financially and they have a great team of devs and product managers working on Elasticsearch. When I first started using ES 3 years ago, I was 90% impressed and knew it would be a good fit. 3 years later, I am 200% impressed and blown away by how far it has come and gotten even better. If there are features that are missing or you don't think it's fast enough right now, I bet it'll be suitable next year because the team behind it is so dang fast!
  • Elasticsearch is really, really stable. It takes a lot to bring down a cluster. It's self-balancing algorithms, leader-election system, self-healing properties are state of the art. We've never seen network failures or hard-drive corruption or CPU bugs bring down an ES cluster.
Read full review
Google
  • Google Search Console insights is a great feature which provides an overview of my top content, how my new content is performing, etc.
  • It gives detailed information around backlinks - who is linking to us, how many backlinks do we have, how is the internal linking within the website, etc.
  • I like the graph feature that shows how the website is performing overall in one month, three months etc. Seeing the graph can help us understand whether it is trending upward or downward and we can shift strategies accordingly.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • These examples are due to the way we use Apache Solr. I think we have had the same problems with other NoSQL databases (but perhaps not the same solution). High data volumes of data and a lot of users were the causes.
  • We have lot of classifications and lot of data for each classification. This gave us several problems:
  • First: We couldn't keep all our data in Solr. Then we have all data in our MySQL DB and searching data in Solr. So we need to be sure to update and match the 2 databases in the same time.
  • Second: We needed several load balanced Solr databases.
  • Third: We needed to update all the databases and keep old data status.
  • If I don't speak about problems due to our lack of experience, the main Solr problem came from frequency of updates vs validation of several database. We encountered several locks due to this (our ops team didn't want to use real clustering, so all DB weren't updated). Problem messages were not always clear and we several days to understand the problems.
Read full review
Elastic
  • Joining data requires duplicate de-normalized documents that make parent child relationships. It is hard and requires a lot of synchronizations
  • Tracking errors in the data in the logs can be hard, and sometimes recurring errors blow up the error logs
  • Schema changes require complete reindexing of an index
Read full review
Google
  • It can be a little difficult to navigate
  • More training resources would be an asset. A beginner is given the power to completely destroy a sites search results at the push of a button. Likewise it is a powerful tool to enhance search results also.
  • An option to take care of multiple versions of the same site simultaneously would be helpful. An option to use the same validation script across all versions and administer them simultaneously would be a time save (i.e. non-www, www, http://, and https:// versions of the same site).
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
No answers on this topic
Elastic
We're pretty heavily invested in ElasticSearch at this point, and there aren't any obvious negatives that would make us reconsider this decision.
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Usability
Apache
It takes some time to deploy and currectly maintein it. And also, to learn how to use and integrate in the enviroment as well. Once you get theses steps done, it usability is very simple, and almost of the time it don't require no further attention on it. Even for maintence, if you deploy it on a cluster mode, it is very reliable and easy to take one host down.
Read full review
Elastic
To get started with Elasticsearch, you don't have to get very involved in configuring what really is an incredibly complex system under the hood. You simply install the package, run the service, and you're immediately able to begin using it. You don't need to learn any sort of query language to add data to Elasticsearch or perform some basic searching. If you're used to any sort of RESTful API, getting started with Elasticsearch is a breeze. If you've never interacted with a RESTful API directly, the journey may be a little more bumpy. Overall, though, it's incredibly simple to use for what it's doing under the covers.
Read full review
Google
It's easy to use, but some features are lacking a clear explanation. Somethings don't always match up. For example, the Core Web Vitals often doesn't match what you would see in the Chrome Lighthouse report or the Google Page Speed Insights tool. The tool itself is a little too basic and has to be used alongside other SEO tools and other Google properties such as Analytics
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
Elastic
We've only used it as an opensource tooling. We did not purchase any additional support to roll out the elasticsearch software. When rolling out the application on our platform we've used the documentation which was available online. During our test phases we did not experience any bugs or issues so we did not rely on support at all.
Read full review
Google
As it is a free tool, you mainly have to rely on their knowledge base and forums. Google has provided in-depth guides and KB for every function of the search console. So, you can refer to it in case of any problem. You can also ask questions on their forums but direct support is not available.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
Elastic
Do not mix data and master roles. Dedicate at least 3 nodes just for Master
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Apache
We tried to use both Elasticsearch and Swiftype with Drupal 8 but there are currently no good modules that integrate Drupal with those solutions. So Solr was really the only option for a Drupal 8 web site. It's not as easy to learn or use as Swiftype, but in the end I think it will be a little less expensive and offer more customization and flexibility.
Read full review
Elastic
As far as we are concerned, Elasticsearch is the gold standard and we have barely evaluated any alternatives. You could consider it an alternative to a relational or NoSQL database, so in cases where those suffice, you don't need Elasticsearch. But if you want powerful text-based search capabilities across large data sets, Elasticsearch is the way to go.
Read full review
Google
SEMRush is a supplementary tool we use to provide competitive analysis. While it does, or should, provide the same data that Search Console does, but I only fully trust Search Console when it comes to basic performance in Google for the sites we develop and own. SEMRush, and other products like it, does provide much more in-depth insights that can help drive business decisions, including site performance on other search engines, along putting organic and paid search performance in one spot. However, SEMRush costs money while Search Console is free.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • It has enabled my organization to find information faster by being a one-stop service to search across content that were indexed from varying sources.
  • By using synonyms and usual lemmatizations / stemming, it enabled discovery of new content following every search.
Read full review
Elastic
  • We have had great luck with implementing Elasticsearch for our search and analytics use cases.
  • While the operational burden is not minimal, operating a cluster of servers, using a custom query language, writing Elasticsearch-specific bulk insert code, the performance and the relative operational ease of Elasticsearch are unparalleled.
  • We've easily saved hundreds of thousands of dollars implementing Elasticsearch vs. RDBMS vs. other no-SQL solutions for our specific set of problems.
Read full review
Google
  • Given that this is a free tool, the return on investment has been particularly high - we've identified and addressed a few site issues that could have meant a reduction in search traffic.
  • Our organic search traffic has been on the rise in part due to the insights gained from the search traffic analytics provided within the console.
Read full review
ScreenShots