We compared LogicMonitor and ScienceLogic across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: LogicMonitor stands out for its seamless integration with external applications, personalized dashboards, and efficient AIOps functionality. ScienceLogic is highly regarded for its serverless and agent connectivity, versatile graphs and personalized dashboards, AIOps, and event management capabilities, as well as its AI and machine learning features.
Room for Improvement: LogicMonitor users have requested better dashboards, customizable alerts, and more automation. Some also suggested improvements in the solution’s AI capabilities. ScienceLogic can enhance its documentation, Power Packs, notification features, and automation options.
Service and Support: LogicMonitor's support team is praised for being helpful, knowledgeable, and responsive. The solution also offers learning resources and ample information to help users navigate and customize the platform. ScienceLogic's customer service is generally considered responsive and professional. However, a few users reported delayed response times and support engineers with limited expertise.
Ease of Deployment: LogicMonitor's initial setup is generally regarded as effortless. Users appreciated the vendor’s help during onboarding and the solution’s extensive documentation. ScienceLogic's initial setup is described as simple and efficient. The deployment process can be completed within a few hours or a couple of weeks.
Pricing: LogicMonitor’s licensing model is based on the size of the environment. It is seen as a high-end solution with a high price tag and may be too costly for smaller organizations. Opinions on the price of ScienceLogic were mixed. Pricing is determined by the number of network devices or endpoints, and there are no hidden charges.
ROI: LogicMonitor users have seen an ROI in the form of increased visibility and shorter resolution times. ScienceLogic improves troubleshooting and minimizes network outages.
Comparison Results: LogicMonitor is a premium solution geared toward large enterprises, featuring smooth integration and advanced AIOps features. Users praised LogicMonitor for its painless setup process and excellent support, but some noted that the solution’s steep price tag might put it out of the range of smaller businesses and that it could improve dashboards and AI capabilities. ScienceLogic is praised for its serverless and agent connectivity, effortless setup, and customized dashboards. However, it lacks detailed documentation and automation options.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"LogicMonitor is good for getting a full view of your topologies. They have LiveMaps, which give you a visual representation of your infrastructure."
"The breadth of its ability to monitor all our environments, putting it in one place, has been helpful. This way, we don't have to manage multiple tools and try to juggle multiple balls to keep our environment monitored. It presents a clear picture to us of what is going on."
"We only have one monitoring tool, and that is LogicMonitor. It does pretty much everything we need under one roof. They are very good at rapidly releasing new features. It's not like we have to wait six months or a year between new features and data sources. There is very quick development. If there is something that doesn't do it for us, I know I can just raise it with support or our delivery representative, and there is a good chance that that will be looked at. If it's not too much effort, we will see it released in the next few months. So, the solution is very good from that perspective. We have everything in LogicMonitor."
"The most valuable feature of LogicMonitor is the infrastructure monitoring capability."
"LogicMonitor added AI technology to help understand what's normal and that has helped quite a bit, so that's the feature I found most valuable in the product. The product is also doing quite well with identifying devices and customizing a particular Cisco version or model number. LogicMonitor continues to be active in updating what is available to be monitored, and it's been very good with keeping those things current, so that's another valuable feature of the product."
"The dashboarding is very useful. Being able to create custom data sources is one of its biggest features which allows quick time to market with new features. If one of our vendors changes their data format or metrics that we should be monitoring, then we can quickly adjust to any changes in the environment in order to get a great user experience for our customers."
"The concept of developing a dashboard template for ourselves, then cloning it for every single customer, and only having to change one piece of information, is a godsend. That's one of the strengths. We can develop a template that fits every customer and just change the information that is presented."
"The solution’s overall reporting capabilities are pretty powerful compared to ones that I have used previously. It seems like it has a lot of customizations that you can put in, but some of the out-of-the-box reports are useful too, like user logon duration and website latency. Those type of things have been helpful and don't require a lot of, if any, changes to get useful content out of them. They have also been pretty easy to implement and use."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"LogicMonitor's reporting capabilities definitely could use an improvement. We have made do with the dashboarding and done what we can to make that work for our customers. However, there are definitely customers who would like a PDF or some kind of report along those lines, where we have been utilizing other tools to provide them. The out-of-the-box LogicMonitor reporting is the only thing that we have been less than impressed with."
"One thing that could be really better is the mapping. Auvik is really good at it. They have a really nice way to give you a visual representation of your network, but in LogicMonitor, this functionality is not as powerful and as good as Auvik."
"One of the areas that I sometimes find confusing is the way that the data is presented. For example, a couple of weeks back I was looking at bandwidth utilization. That's quite a difficult thing to present, but they should try to dumb down how the data is presented and simplify what they're presenting."
"There is a lack of automation, especially in terms of remediating problems. The problem is seen and identified, but there is a need and a gap where LogicMonitor can help us automate the remediation of the problem."
"The only functional area I can think of that has room for improvement would be the dashboards. They could use a refresh. It would be nice if there were more widgets and more types of widgets."
"The process of upgrading some of the collectors has been a little bit confusing. I need to understand that better."
"LogicMonitor can easily easy to pull data from one item at a time. I have yet to find a good way to get LogicMonitor to show me all the WAN devices and how they're doing in terms of capacity."
"One thing I would like to see is parent/child relationships and the ability to build a "suppression parent/child." For example, If I know that a top gateway is offline and I can't talk to it anymore, and anything that's connected below it or to it is also going to be offline, there is no need to alarm on those. In that situation it should create one ticket or one alarm for the parent. I know they're working towards that with their mapping technology, but it's not quite to that level where you can build out alarm logic or a correlation logic like that."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"They need a little more self-service."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"Addressing duplicate IPs: There is the ability to edit the DB and fix this, but adding some logic to understand them would be a plus."
"We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"The product is not user-friendly."
LogicMonitor is ranked 14th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 25 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 42 reviews. LogicMonitor is rated 9.0, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of LogicMonitor writes "We went from nothing to full visibility across our internal and external estates of equipment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". LogicMonitor is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, OpsRamp, SCOM and ThousandEyes, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog, Zabbix and ServiceNow Discovery. See our LogicMonitor vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, best Network Monitoring Software 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.