We performed a comparison between LogicMonitor and Statseeker 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."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"We get full visibility into whatever the customer wants us to monitor and we get it pretty rapidly. That is very important. Only having certain metrics that other platforms will give you out-of-the-box means you only get a small picture, a thumbnail picture. Whereas with LogicMonitor, you get the entire "eight by 10 picture", out-of-the-box. Rather than some availability metrics, you get everything. You get metrics on temperature, anything related to hardware failure, or up and down status."
"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."
"Another feature from the technical aspect, the back-end, is the ability to allow individual users or customers to have their own APIs. They're able to make changes using the plugins covered by LogicMonitor. That is a very powerful feature that is more attractive to our techno-savvy customers."
"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 dashboards are the big seller for us. When our customers can see those graphs and are able to interact with the data, that is valuable. They can easily adjust time ranges and the graphs display the data fast. We've used other tools in the past, where you'd say, "Hey, I want the last three months of data on a graph," and it would just sit there and crunch for five minutes before you'd actually see the data. With LogicMonitor, the fast reliability of those dashboards is huge."
"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."
"We have very fine-tuned alerting that lets us know when there are issues by identifying where exactly that issue is, so we can troubleshoot and resolve them quickly. This is hopefully before the customer even notices. Then, it gives us some insight into potential issues coming down the road through our environmental health dashboards."
"If you need a product that's able to monitor all the ports in your environment or all the ports that you want, this is a great product to use. Statseeker is quite flexible in tailoring the product, spending time tailoring the product with you. It's fairly low maintenance. It's quite quick."
"This solution allowed us to track down trouble users."
"Grouping, Threshold/alerts, Netflow analyser, Private MIB object support are most valuable as they can provide more visibility into network performance, and for network troubleshooting."
"Key features for us are custom reporting, 95th Percentile, and trend lines."
"I like the fact that I can aggregate multiple interfaces into a single graph. It allows me to quickly the summary of traffic for multiple devices which is helpful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the simplicity of adding new devices into it."
"If somebody is complaining about slow networking then this solution allows us to see various ports to find out whether they are being overloaded."
"The most important for us is how fast this solution is, as well as the granularity that you can get to, such as per-minute statistics."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Their Logs feature is quite new. It is not as feature-rich as we would like it to be. There have been a couple of conversations internally around other log management tools, like Splunk, which may do more for us than LM Logs. The benefit of LogicMonitor is that our staff know how to use it, so we don't really want to move away from it, if we don't have to. I fully expect there to be more development in this area. It is their newest feature, so it is understandable that it hasn't evolved as some of the other stuff. It would be good to see a bit more development in this area, but I think the monitoring side of things is spot on."
"We would like to see more functionality around mapping of topologies, in terms of networks. An improvement that we would like to see is added functionality to get more detail out of mapping. For example, if the LogicMonitor Collector identifies a connection between two network endpoints, it would be great to actually see which ports are connecting the two endpoints together. That functionality is something we greatly desire. It would actually make our documentation more dynamic in the sense that we wouldn't need to manually document. If this is something that the platform could provide, then this would be a great asset."
"One drawback of LogicMonitor is its licensing model, which requires an additional license for each module. For example, if you need to use Azure monitoring, you'll need an additional license on top of the base license."
"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."
"LogicMonitor should improve its logging features. It can become expensive and should be cost-effective. It would be great to see prebuilt templates for alerting methods in LogicMonitor that are similar to the prebuilt dashboards. Currently, users have to build their alerting configurations."
"Some more application performance type monitoring would be nice. For example, an APM type solution, which would not necessarily completely replace it, but be able to tie into to what we're seeing on the application performance side so we can correlate what's going on with the application versus the underlying infrastructure."
"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."
"It needs better access for customizing and adding monitoring from the repository. That would be helpful. It seems like you have to search through the forums to figure out what specific pieces you need to get in for specific monitoring, if it's a nonstandard piece of equipment or process. You have to hunt and find certain elements to get them in place. If they could make it a bit easier rather having to find the right six-digit code to put in so it implements, that would be helpful."
"I would like to see some layer two and layer three topology mappings, similar to what NNMi and SolarWinds presents."
"I would like to see a friendlier user interface in the administration tool."
"We haven't seen an ROI."
"If it had more detailed NetFlow information then it would be far better."
"Configuration management: In configuration management it would be helpful if it would backup configuration files (running and start-up configuration) for devices. (Not sure if this is already available in the latest version)."
"The inclusion of configuration management features and SIP links would improve this solution."
"With Statseeker I'd like to see some flow, i.e. what's tuning-up the network. The trend I like is managing the traffic load by going to the cloud."
"I would like to have soft alarming. If an inner-base all of a sudden triggers a threshold, we have to rely on a lot of other tools and then we go into Statseeker to verify it. If Statseeker would confirm it preemptively and trigger it into our network panel, that would be nice."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
LogicMonitor is ranked 16th in Network Monitoring Software with 25 reviews while Statseeker is ranked 64th in Network Monitoring Software with 38 reviews. LogicMonitor is rated 9.0, while Statseeker is rated 8.2. 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 Statseeker writes "Simplifies monitoring and provides real-time alerts for issues we might not immediately be aware of otherwise". LogicMonitor is most compared with ScienceLogic, SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, OpsRamp and SCOM, whereas Statseeker is most compared with Fortinet FortiSIEM. See our LogicMonitor vs. Statseeker report.
See our list of best Network 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.
