Learn how Logstash and Vector differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these log management tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
6 hours agoRepository age
16 yearsVersion
v9.5.5Self-hosted
YesRepository
elastic/logstash
Last 30 days
Last commit
2 days agoRepository age
8 yearsVersion
v0.60.0License
MPL-2.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
vectordotdev/vector
Vector appears to have several advantages over Logstash, particularly in popularity, growth and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Vector leads in popularity with 22,766 stars vs 14,969 stars for Logstash. The 52% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Logstash has 3,500 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Vector is growing faster, adding 147 stars in the last 30 days (+0.6%) against adding 19 stars for Logstash (+0.1%). Vector is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Logstash last updated 6 hours ago and Vector 2 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with CSS, Bash. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Logstash uses Python, C, Java, Ruby while Vector leverages JavaScript, Typescript, JSX, Rust, Lua.
Logstash has been in development longer, starting 16 years ago, compared to Vector which began 8 years ago. This 7.9-year head start suggests Logstash may have more mature features and established processes.
Vector is licensed under MPL-2.0, while Logstash's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Log Management. However, they also have distinct specializations: Logstash also focuses on ETL & Data Integration, Stream Processing.
Both Logstash and Vector offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.