We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and SolarWinds Pingdom based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment."
"Good load and metrics gathering and very good analysis."
"Technical support is good and helpful...The initial setup is easy."
"It's a Microsoft native tool, so it works well with other Microsoft technologies, which is predominantly what our customer end-user base is."
"I am impressed by the reporting on the average eight ports that we get from this solution."
"The solution has tons of valuable features."
"In the last company where I worked about a year ago, it looked very simple."
"The solution very easily integrates with Azure services and in one click you can monitor your resource."
"Once you set the threshold on your environment, it feels very real-time"
"There are alerting mechanisms in place to let us know, for example, if a device is not responding to a ping test and is probably not going to work."
"One notable feature of this software is its page speed setup, which is highly commendable. Additionally, the metrics it provides are also impressive."
"The most valuable features are monitoring and reporting."
"Lacks information including details related to where problems lie."
"They need to work on a more hybrid deployment that will allow us to monitor local on-premise deployments and connect to different systems. I would like to see more integration."
"There is room for improvement in stability."
"In terms of pricing, Azure Monitor's billing based on data size can sometimes lead to increased costs, especially when developers need to purge data frequently. While there are mechanisms in place to track and manage this, there is room for improvement in terms of optimizing data pausing and related processes. Enhancements in this area could help mitigate potential billing concerns and provide a more seamless experience for users."
"The biggest one is probably just the user interface. There could be more advanced logging at the database level. They can also improve their query builder to allow you to search for things better, but I last used it about a year ago. They might have already changed a ton of things in the newer versions."
"Currently, it seems it's complicated to get the correct information in terms of what to do and how things work."
"The length of latency is terrible and needs to be improved."
"Setting up this solution is complex. It's also missing the functionality of assigning alerts."
"Some of the functions could improve by making them easier."
"Technical support could use some improvement."
"I would like to see better integration with other products."
"Pingdom is always improving everything in its product. So, they should work on the GUI."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while SolarWinds Pingdom is ranked 49th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 4 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while SolarWinds Pingdom is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Pingdom writes "High performance, quick setup, but lacking ease of use". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and Honeycomb.io, whereas SolarWinds Pingdom is most compared with Grafana, Solarwinds Web Performance Monitor and New Relic. See our Azure Monitor vs. SolarWinds Pingdom report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.