We performed a comparison between Centreon and Elastic Observability based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product is available in ISO image format, ready for deployment. Centreon also has a comprehensive guide and documentation that are simple and easy to follow."
"The single-pane view provides us a view of all of our network infrastructure, and it is one of the most important tools that we use to see the status of our customers' networks."
"We are alerted on service impacts and not when something is down. We have saved a lot of time on non-business-hours intervention."
"We have the business activity monitoring, the map, and the MBI modules and they are all very good."
"Another feature we use is Business Activity, which provides us with an end-user perspective when a service is down or isn't working correctly. This is helpful when monitoring the KPIs. When we see a device or server that isn't working, we find the root cause."
"Centreon helps me detect where the problem is quickly. When we resolve a problem quickly, this lowers our overall costs."
"Centreon's most valuable features are preventative maintenance and cost-efficiency. Everything is monitored, and we get a log before the system fails. We have an opportunity to fix the issue and avoid downtime."
"What we like about it is that, whereas with Nagios, by design, if you have five or six data centers, you have to open five or six web pages to see what's going on, In Centreon, this is all included in one page, a single site, one dashboard. You don't have to jump from one specific dashboard to the other."
"Good design and easy to use once implemented."
"It's easy to deploy, and it's very flexible."
"We use AppDynamics and Elastic. The reason why we're using Elastic APM is because of the license count. It's very favorable compared to AppDynamics. It's inexpensive; it's economical."
"The solution is open-source and helps with back-end logging. It is also easy to handle."
"The price is very less expensive compared to the other solutions."
"For full stack observability, Elastic is the best tool compared with any other tool ."
"The ability to ensure that the data is searchable and maintainable is highly valuable for our purposes."
"I have built a mini business intelligence system based on Elastic Observability."
"Release management and quality of testing need improvement, because with each major upgrade we have many issues coming in. Then, it takes several minor upgrades to get rid of them."
"Centreon needs to improve the granularity of the data as well as the graphical data. It would also be better to if there was improvement to the filtering/grouping system as well as the creation of views."
"This solution lacks service monitoring in the cloud."
"Opening a ticket on the website of Centreon can be difficult for my colleague, but not for me because my English is good. However, my colleague doesn't speak English well, as our company is in Quebec and our first language is French."
"During the initial setup we faced some issues. Part of it was because we had to become more knowledgeable in the solution. There are some gray areas and if you don't know the product well you may have issues. Another part of it was some bugs that we came across, although that's part of every software solution in IT nowadays. But the initial setup could be easier."
"Improvements are needed in the area of cloud monitoring, as that's a newer feature."
"Centreon is very bad with auto-scanning. It's very monolithic software. It doesn't have microservices and it only has basic clustering. You cannot, for example, have six or seven nodes for Centreon's cloud processes."
"I went through a few things with them to do with Centreon MAP, to do with active polygons, being able to draw an area and make that active. The functionality was in the older version of Centreon MAP and in the new version, which was a complete rewrite, they dropped it."
"The solution would be better if it was capable of more automation, especially in a monitoring capacity or for the response to abnormalities."
"There could be more low-code features included in the product."
"The cost must be made more transparent."
"They need more skills in the market. There are not enough skills in the market. It is not pervasive enough on the market, in my opinion. In other words, there isn't a big enough user base."
"If we had some pre-defined templates for observability that we could start using right away after deploying it – instead of having to build or to change some of the dashboards – that would be helpful."
"There is room for improvement regarding its APM capabilities."
"The price is the only issue in the solution. It can be made better and cheaper."
"The interface could be improved."
Centreon is ranked 11th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 27 reviews while Elastic Observability is ranked 10th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews. Centreon is rated 8.6, while Elastic Observability is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Centreon writes "Proactive reporting guides our NOC on what needs to be fixed, saving them time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Elastic Observability writes "The user interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. ". Centreon is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios Core, Icinga and Meraki Dashboard, whereas Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, AppDynamics, Azure Monitor and Sentry. See our Centreon vs. Elastic Observability report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.