We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) 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."You can scale the product."
"It's a Microsoft native tool, so it works well with other Microsoft technologies, which is predominantly what our customer end-user base is."
"The solution very easily integrates with Azure services and in one click you can monitor your resource."
"One of the most useful aspects of this solution is the out-of-the-box functionality on all areas, especially on Application Insights, zero instrumentation, and artificial intelligence for event correlation."
"Azure Monitor is very stable."
"Technical support is good and helpful...The initial setup is easy."
"The most valuable feature is that it's stable. It hasn't crossed any thresholds."
"The most valuable features of Azure Monitor are the login analytics workspace and we can write any kind of custom queries in order to receive the data that is inserted into the login analytics workspace, diagnostic settings, et cetera."
"Service Bus topic subscription monitoring turned out to be the most useful for us."
"It offers all the core capabilities we need to manage and monitor our Azure services."
"I would like more transparency when we use the solution with another environment, like on-premises, or on another cloud environment, like AWS or GCP."
"Although it's not always the case, the price can sometimes get expensive. This depends on a number of factors, such as how many services you are trying to integrate with Azure Monitor and how much storage they're consuming each month (for example, how large are the log files?)."
"Azure Monitor could improve the visualization aspect and integrate better with other third-party services."
"I'd like the solution to do more around vulnerability assessment. It's lacking in the product right now."
"Lacks information including details related to where problems lie."
"The monitoring of Kubernetes clusters needs improvement to be on par with competitors."
"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 solution should have cross-connection or cross-communication between tech partners."
"Addition of more monitoring features to Azure Cosmos DB can be a huge help as we use the same as the main database for our applications."
"The user interface of Serveress360 could be improved a bit to make the platform even easier to use."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is ranked 39th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 2 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is rated 9.0. 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 Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) writes "Great topic subscription monitoring, helpful management, and useful for audits". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Prometheus, Sentry and Grafana, whereas Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is most compared with . See our Azure Monitor vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.