We performed a comparison between BigPanda and Loom Systems based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The best of a bad lot was the error message deduping."
"The solution is user-friendly and has good performance and certification."
"The event correlation is really good and it is able to reduce the noise. It is a good tool for anomaly detection."
"The main thing that we like about BigPanda is the user interface."
"Alert aggregation was the primary requirement. BigPanda pulls all this together into a single UI for us, allowing us to see related alerts grouped together into an incident, and enables us to easily create a JIRA ticket and Slack channel to manage an issue."
"BigPanda integrates well with other solutions, such as WatchGuard,"
"The program is very stable."
"A user-friendly solution."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."
"Our infrastructure is quite large - tens of thousands of servers, often with 30-plus checks running on each host with one minute intervals. This generates a lot of data often in bursts (when we have a large scale failure). This has caused some delay in the ingestion pipeline."
"BigPanda could improve by syncing its threshold settings with Dynatrace to align with users' familiarity."
"Lacks sufficient dashboard features."
"The observability can be enriched with regards to infrastructure and the application-integrated environment. The dashboard and reports could be improved."
"The UI for this solution could be improved. It is very hard to find what you are looking for."
"The usability needs to improve, because it is a pure code environment."
"The cost of this product is too high compared to New Relic."
"The solution could improve by having better integration."
"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."
BigPanda is ranked 43rd in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 12 reviews while Loom Systems is ranked 57th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 4 reviews. BigPanda is rated 7.2, while Loom Systems is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BigPanda writes "Offers comprehensive alert monitoring and a user-friendly interface but requires manual validation to provide accurate alerts". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Loom Systems writes "Simple and very effective for developing and configuring apps with great integration capabilities". BigPanda is most compared with ServiceNow, Moogsoft, PagerDuty Operations Cloud, ServiceNow IT Operations Management and IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus, whereas Loom Systems is most compared with Elastic Search and Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring. See our BigPanda vs. Loom Systems report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.