We performed a comparison between Kaseya Traverse and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"Kaseya Traverse is a very stable solution and very sustainable in terms of what the market wants, what is out there, price-wise and functionality features. They're quite competitive and they are always innovating."
"It's a simple and humble tool."
"It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution."
"We have found the solution to be very flexible to our requirements. We have been able to configure it on-premise effectively when we were using less of the cloud."
"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."
"The remote support and data collection features are great."
"Most of the features are pretty good and the solution is user friendly."
"SolarWinds SAM has provided us with dynamic thresholds based on historical trends and requirements. The threshold gets configured automatically, so it's no longer necessary to configure it manually every time."
"I am impressed with the tool's AppStack feature which mainly helps us in the identification process. This feature can give an overview of the fault and help us identify the issues for performance degradation. Instead of looking at multiple places, we can look at a single place to identify the issues."
"Management Console - Managing service to each server enrolled in the Solarwinds is much easier. Using a web base console, you can control your service much convenient way. There is no need to login remotely. It save a lot of time and effort."
"The most valuable feature is the Access Rights Manager."
"It's good at monitoring system-specific things like ports, services."
"The component and cable monitoring are good. SolarWinds is more intuitive and user-friendly than AppDynamics. The AppDynamics console is more complex because it's a more feature-rich solution, so it's not easy for somebody to pick it up."
"Extremely user friendly: Any IT professional can learn how to admin NPM in a short time."
"The initial setup was relatively easy, and we didn't have to install anything. All we had to do was put on the devices we wanted to monitor."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect."
"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."
"In terms of what could be improved, we are innovating all the time, as well as having a look at different avenues so that the strategy follows the structure. I think the software is still a little bit too new to actually fully asses what it has."
"Reporting is a bit difficult."
"Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us."
"Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also."
"We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product."
"Reporting is the only thing with which we currently have challenges. They have this in two ways. There is the report writer, which is the backend, and we also have web reports, which are on the console. So, they have removed the report writer for the backend reports, and we are making use of the web console, but most of the users are not finding it very interesting to use the frontend reports. I would like them to bring back the report writer. That's the key area within it to improve on the reporting. If they can bring back the report writer, then most users will actually be comfortable. I have some customers who are trying to export their report to an Excel format, but it is not possible because they said any report that has been done from the web console cannot be exported to Excel, but most of the customers need to export their reports to Excel. That's one area they need to work on."
"Nodes in Azure are able to be monitored with the use of agents, but this does not apply to cloud service offerings that are not node based."
"There is one feature that is a report writer. And they are currently trying to take it out from being a stand-alone application and integrating to the web. This doesn't give us the flexibility and it doesn't expand what we can get when it comes to reporting. So, putting it on the web is going to make it difficult to get some information. Leaving it where it is now will help us a lot."
"They should incorporate more artificial intelligence. There should also be more predictive features."
"The setup was complex. We had local support to assist us."
"The product does not explain why a problem occurred."
"An additional feature that would improve this solution is the ability to complete root cause analysis."
"I believe that some of the trends, environmental maps, and items like those found in Orion would be very beneficial."
More SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaseya Traverse is ranked 67th in Network Monitoring Software with 7 reviews while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is ranked 11th in Server Monitoring with 38 reviews. Kaseya Traverse is rated 6.6, while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaseya Traverse writes "A stable network monitoring tool requiring an easy initial setup phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor writes "We use this product for base and application monitoring. ". Kaseya Traverse is most compared with LogicMonitor, Auvik Network Management (ANM), PRTG Network Monitor and SolarWinds NPM, whereas SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is most compared with Azure Monitor, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and ServiceNow Discovery.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
