We performed a comparison between Grafana and ITRS Geneos based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Grafana boasts customizable and visually appealing graphs, flexible integration with other tools, and the ability to cater to multiple use cases. Meanwhile, ITRS Geneos, while highly customizable and flexible, requires a lot of manual work for creating dashboards and lacks a mobile app. It also has a complex initial setup process and may be too expensive for non-banking and non-finance industries. Overall, Grafana is more user-friendly and cost-effective, with a wider range of features and better community support, making it the preferred solution.
"The most important feature of Grafana is its alarm formatting capability."
"Plugin: Connecting Grafana to multiple APIs of leading monitoring tools and alerting tools."
"Compatibility with Prometheus databases and the Spring Boot application make it the first choice when moving toward an SRE model."
"The dashboards are very easy to work with."
"It excels in providing comprehensive details when there are downtimes or fluctuations, offering thorough reports."
"It gives us the visibility we need. I like that when we add deployment markers or release markers, we know exactly when an issue arises. For instance, if there is an increased usage of CPU, we can link it directly to the deployment that might have caused the issue. It increases productivity and observability. We can now easily tell when a certain issue arises. It's way easier to debug because it can point you to certain things based on these markers, and we can debug easier."
"The integration between Loki and Tempo is valuable."
"It is a stable solution."
"One of the most valuable features is that it can be configured by non-developers. It doesn't require development expertise to configure it."
"ITRS uses SNMP to communicate with our devices as well as SNMP net probes installed on our servers."
"The great advantage of this tool is real-time monitoring."
"The ability to logically normalize data gathered from multiple types of sources via pre-built plugins is extremely powerful. This functionality, coupled with the ability to import custom data via the Toolkit plugin allows Geneos to be leveraged to monitor every system in the enterprise."
"This tool allows one to analyse, integrate and customize as per the systems and allows you to set your own rules."
"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."
"The ability to completely tailor and customize what it's monitoring is one of its strongest points. A lot of other monitoring tools are good at certain things, but one of my colleagues described it as the “Swiss Army Knife” of monitoring tools. It can do anything you want."
"The biggest benefit of Geneos is the fact that we can clearly see, if we have an alert, where that alert has come from. We can see the data around that alert and anything that might be relevant is also shown. We can very easily right-click and see why we've received that alert. That's the best part about it, that you've got all the data there with the alerting."
"There are not a lot of plugins for financial market monitoring."
"There are some areas of network drives that are not showing as expected based on server usage."
"The look and feel of the charting and graph capabilities in Grafana could improve. If they provided a storyboard type of feature as they have in other solutions, such as PowerBI. The multi-tenanted and stitch metrics features could improve."
"Trigger limits are difficult to see in a graph."
"The formatting could be better."
"The documentation or training provided by Grafana is limited compared to its competitors, like Splunk."
"It can take a considerable amount of time to learn the graphs if a long duration is selected."
"Writing queries can be a bit difficult because the syntax must be maintained."
"Currently, it is difficult to monitor secure websites using SSL or with SSO enabled."
"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."
"The main feature that needs work is the Dashboard designer."
"I would like ITRS Geneos to develop an app, where instead of going to specific login terminals or logging into laptops or desktops to check alerts, we can have visibility in the app itself."
"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."
"The ITA, the post-incident analytics, could be improved."
"It needs to be easier to configure, especially with the JMX plugins."
Grafana is ranked 6th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 38 reviews while ITRS Geneos is ranked 11th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 57 reviews. Grafana is rated 8.0, while ITRS Geneos is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Grafana writes "Agent-free with great dashboards and an active community". 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". Grafana is most compared with New Relic, Azure Monitor, Sentry, Dynatrace and Coralogix, whereas ITRS Geneos is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus, Datadog and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Grafana vs. ITRS Geneos 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.
