We performed a comparison between Kaseya Traverse and LogicMonitor based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"We have found the solution to be very flexible to our requirements. We have been able to configure it on-premise effectively when we were using less of the cloud."
"It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution."
"It's a simple and humble tool."
"The remote support and data collection features are great."
"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."
"Most of the features are pretty good and the solution is user friendly."
"Kaseya Traverse is a very stable solution and very sustainable in terms of what the market wants, what is out there, price-wise and functionality features. They're quite competitive and they are always innovating."
"LogicMonitor improved on-premises infrastructure monitoring in several ways. One key feature was dynamic resource allocation, although we didn't utilize it much in our system. The main functionalities we benefited from were email alerts, network mapping, and dashboards."
"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."
"I really appreciate the reporting function because it allows me to create dashboards that will be emailed to me during the morning so that I have a complete overview of my client's health, within a specific time frame."
"Having a full team at LogicMonitor for support is super helpful as they are available all the time to answer any questions you may have."
"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."
"One thing that's very valuable for us is the technical knowledge of the people who work with LogicMonitor. We looked at several products before we decided to use LogicMonitor, and one of the key decision-making points was the knowledge of the things that they put in the product. It provides real intelligence regarding the numbers that you see on the product, which makes it easy for us technical people to troubleshoot. Other products don't provide you with such information. You see a value going up, but you don't know what it means. LogicMonitor provides such information. For instance, if a value goes up, it says that it is probably because your disk area was too low."
"The alerting would be number one in my book. The thresholds for getting alerts for different criteria are pretty well-thought-out. We don't get many false positives or negatives on the alerting side. If we do get an email alert or some similar alert, we know that it is something that has to be looked at."
"Whenever we reach out to our customers, we give LogicMonitor as a dashboard to them so they don't need to monitor the hardware side separately. For example, if my service is running on their hardware X, that means they don't need to monitor hardware X and our services too. LogicMonitor has the capability of monitoring their hardware as well as our services. This is how LogicMonitor helps us."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product."
"Reporting is a bit difficult."
"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."
"Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also."
"Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us."
"Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect."
"In terms of what could be improved, we are innovating all the time, as well as having a look at different avenues so that the strategy follows the structure. I think the software is still a little bit too new to actually fully asses what it has."
"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."
"Dashboarding capabilities could be enhanced. It is cumbersome, you must do it all at once, and then you must repeat the process every now and then."
"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."
"The ease of use with data source tuning could be improved. That can get hairy quickly. When I reach out for help, it's usually around a data source or event source configuration. That can get challenging."
"The process of upgrading some of the collectors has been a little bit confusing. I need to understand that better."
"The dashboards can be improved. They are good, but there is a pain point. To show things to management, to explain pain points to other customers, to show them exactly where we can do better, the dashboarding could be better. Dashboards need to show the key things. Nobody is going to go into the ample details of Excel sheets or HTML."
"We are working with LogicMonitor to get flexibility to see the absolute running numbers, rather than doing an average. They can keep the average for customers who want it, but there should be a way to at least show the real numbers, which are coming every second on the screen."
"There are some very specific things that need improvement in LogicMonitor. One is the lack of formatting for customized alerts, particularly the delivery of them to our email channel. We'd also like to see further customization of dashboards. Finally, something that is specific to us as an MSP that uses LogicMonitor, is white-labeling or skinning of the product, so we can make it look more customer-focused for our customers."
Kaseya Traverse is ranked 67th in Network Monitoring Software with 7 reviews while LogicMonitor is ranked 16th in Network Monitoring Software with 25 reviews. Kaseya Traverse is rated 6.6, while LogicMonitor is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Kaseya Traverse writes "A stable network monitoring tool requiring an easy initial setup phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of LogicMonitor writes "We went from nothing to full visibility across our internal and external estates of equipment". Kaseya Traverse is most compared with Auvik Network Management (ANM) and PRTG Network Monitor, whereas LogicMonitor is most compared with ScienceLogic, SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, OpsRamp and SCOM. See our Kaseya Traverse vs. LogicMonitor report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
