Firebase and Crashlytics - Which one to use? [closed]

Question

Since the presentation of Firebase Crash Reporting, one of the most prominent questions has been wether moving from Crashlytics or not.

What are the pros and cons when comparing the two crash reporting services?

Answer 1

There are pros and cons, as listed below, when considering the switch between the two.

NOTE: Firebase Crash Reporting is currently labeled as beta, and Google is still collecting early feedback in order to improve the service. So things that are missing now are most likely to be added in the near future. (no longer in Beta as of Nov 7th 2016)

Pros

• Both ordinary and native crashes (It seems native crashes are only visible in Crashlytics@Fabric console for now) are displayed in Firebase
• Automatically integrates with Firebase Analytics, which enables grouping users that experienced crashes into an audience and gives context (through events) to the crash
• Dead-easy setup (just include the Gradle module)
• All-in-one console with other Firebase products (if you plan on using them)
• Lower number of methods (even though it includes Analytics, using the standard methods allows ProGuard to strip almost everything, so props to Google for that)
• Possible to turn off gathering analytics on a per-user basis [thanks racs]
• Sends notification emails for new and regressed issues (as Fabric does)

Cons

• Searching through crashes is not available
• ProGuard/DexGuard mapping files have to be uploaded manually (Google is on this)
• Impossible to have a listener in the session just after a crash occurred
• Requires Google Play Services on the device (big requirement) [thanks Gerrit Hoekstra]

---

All in all, Crashlytics is much more feature complete, but Firebase is about to catch up on a lot of stuff. Both are free, so that is not an obstacle.

UPDATE 09/12/2016

I've updated this answer thanks to the inputs of Ali.