Comparison
TracePath vs Grafana (LGTM stack).
TracePath vs the Grafana LGTM stack: one observability backend instead of four, with the same OpenTelemetry plumbing underneath.
- The LGTM stack (Loki, Grafana, Tempo, Mimir) is powerful and battle-tested, but it is four or more stateful systems to operate.
- TracePath collapses the same signals into one binary with one query surface, dashboards included.
- Grafana stays useful as a visualization layer — TracePath even imports Grafana dashboards.
Capabilities
Side by side.
| Capability | TracePath | Grafana (LGTM stack) |
|---|---|---|
| Unified UI for logs/traces/metrics | Yes | Yes |
| Number of stateful components | 1 | 4+ |
| Single-binary self-host | Yes | No |
| Error tracking & session replay | Yes | No |
| Dashboards as code | Yes | Yes |
| OpenTelemetry ingest | Yes | Yes |
| Query language | SQL (ClickHouse) | LogQL/TraceQL/PromQL |
| Uptime monitors & on-call | Yes | Yes |
Capabilities verified 2026-09-18. Spotted something stale? Tell us.
FAQ
Common questions.
Does TracePath replace Grafana dashboards?
For TracePath data, yes — and you can import existing Grafana dashboard JSON instead of rebuilding panels.
Can I keep Grafana and point it at TracePath?
TODO-verify: document exposing TracePath's ClickHouse/OTLP endpoints as Grafana datasources; verify which datasource plugins are supported today.
Set up in minutes
Works with your stack.
Other comparisons
See your app the way users do.
Errors, traces, logs, replay and monitors — one OpenTelemetry-native backend, self-hosted or cloud.