Catchpoint is one of several that can perform this same function. I generally consider the raw capabilities of all these tools to be somewhat commodified at this point. They're relatively mature, and I don't see much difference. 

You have an endpoint somewhere and configure a test. It runs from the endpoint and tells you if your stuff is available. That's generally what these tools do. Most importantly, we don't need people sitting in front of this tool all the time. They don't have to sit there and watch it.

We evaluated other options like ThousandEyes, and our existing product was Dynatrace, which was rebranded as Gomez. There was one more. We took the three and did a bake-off. 

A client uses New Relic because the UI is straightforward for business users but I prefer the way I can slice data in Catchpoint. 

During that time we evaluated New Relic. New Relic did not have an on-prem node. We had some internal applications, so we needed both internal and external application monitoring. The internal application monitoring was not supported, only the external application was supported by New Relic. Whereas, at that time, Catchpoint supported both, so that's one reason.

The other reason was that Catchpoint uses a scripting language called Selenium, which is very similar to our testing framework, so it was really easy. The Selenium test scripting framework was the main reason we picked it because our team, our company, is familiar with this language, the scripting language they use for all the monitoring scripts.

We also evaluated Dynatrace. Dynatrace was closer, but at that time they didn't have the same kind of on-prem node.