We performed a comparison between Elastic Observability and ITRS Geneos for Valuable based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Elastic Observability offers machine learning, custom development, and easy data management. ITRS Geneos is highly customizable but needs improvement in deployment and cloud monitoring. Its setup can also be complex and require onsite support. Both products have reasonable pricing, but Elastic Observability is cost-effective and helps organizations achieve their objectives at a lower price, making it the preferred option.
"It has always been a stable solution."
"The ability to ensure that the data is searchable and maintainable is highly valuable for our purposes."
"The architecture and system's stability are simple."
"Elastic APM has plenty of features, such as the Elastic server for Kibana and many additional plugins. It's a comprehensive tool when used as a logging platform."
"It is a powerful tool that allows users to collect and transform logs as needed, enabling flexible visualization and analysis."
"Machine learning is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"For full stack observability, Elastic is the best tool compared with any other tool ."
"The solution is open-source and helps with back-end logging. It is also easy to handle."
"Ability to monitor logs for potential issues to prevent app outages before problems get a chance to arise. That's invaluable for our teams in a fast-paced trading environment."
"The clean and colorful UI and easy to use options like snooze and active times."
"Custom script toolkits"
"In my experience, being able to monitor our databases is a valuable feature as we can create our own queries and aren't reliant on the in-built ones."
"It's a very powerful application monitoring tool across the industry. Many free, open-source tools are available. There are also paid tools, but ITRS Geneos is a real-time application monitoring tool where the user can monitor, self-configure, and manage alerts through their console."
"It enables us to monitor application processes, to do log-monitoring on a 24/7 basis, to do server-level monitoring - all the hardware parameters - as well as monitor connectivity across applications to the interfaces."
"One of the most valuable features is that it can be configured by non-developers. It doesn't require development expertise to configure it."
"The Netprobe is so lightweight compared to the agents that most monitoring tools use. It's really superior to the competition. The agent that is used by almost every competitive tool takes a lot more system resources. It's slower and it requires a greater effort and more compromises in terms of security to install on the monitored servers. With Geneos, because it lives outside the code, it is far easier and far less taxing on the monitored systems."
"The solution needs to use more AI. Once the product onboards AI, users would more effectively be able to track endpoints for specific messages."
"The cost must be made more transparent."
"The solution would be better if it was capable of more automation, especially in a monitoring capacity or for the response to abnormalities."
"Elastic Observability’s price could be improved."
"The auto-discovery isn't nearly as good. That's a big portion of it. When you drop the agent onto the JVM and you're trying to figure things out, having to go through and manually do all that is cumbersome."
"Elastic Observability is reactive rather than proactive. It should act as an ITSM tool and be able to create tickets and alerts on Jira."
"More web features could be added to the product."
"In the future, Elastic APM needs a portfolio iTool. They can provide an easy way to develop the custom UI for Kibana."
"The deployment method for upgrading is a bit tricky. It takes a little bit of manual effort. If that could be a bit more automated, it would help us a lot."
"Sometimes, if there is a lot of data coming onto the servers, we have observed a little bit of slowness on the gateway servers which are doing the ITRS dashboard monitoring."
"t needs to have better middleware integration for things such as application and Microsft SQL servers."
"One thing that could be improved in terms of rapid scaling would be more ability to clone aspects of an implementation. It seems like there are opportunities in this area, where we have repetitive tasks to do when it comes to implementing things on new servers or on new gateways. It would be great if there was an easy way to clone something that had already been done."
"Mobile phone integration is probably not as rich as it could be."
"For the solution to stay relevant in the cloud-based monitoring environment Geneos needs more plug-ins with more features. Instead of offering clients workarounds, the solution should have a cloud-based out-of-the-box version."
"I would like to see ITRS integrate its setup editor with a SVN to check-in setup XML after major changes."
"Backward compatibility with deprecated features and in system documentation on what configuration areas are needed to be updated."
Elastic Observability is ranked 7th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 22 reviews while ITRS Geneos is ranked 11th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 57 reviews. Elastic Observability is rated 7.8, while ITRS Geneos is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Elastic Observability writes "The user interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ITRS Geneos writes "The flexible dashboard sets it apart from competing tools, but it's costly and lacks scalability". Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, AppDynamics, Azure Monitor and Splunk APM, whereas ITRS Geneos is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Grafana, Prometheus and Nagios XI. See our Elastic Observability vs. ITRS Geneos report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.
