We compared LogicMonitor and ScienceLogic across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: LogicMonitor stands out for its seamless integration with external applications, personalized dashboards, and efficient AIOps functionality. ScienceLogic is highly regarded for its serverless and agent connectivity, versatile graphs and personalized dashboards, AIOps, and event management capabilities, as well as its AI and machine learning features.
Room for Improvement: LogicMonitor users have requested better dashboards, customizable alerts, and more automation. Some also suggested improvements in the solution’s AI capabilities. ScienceLogic can enhance its documentation, Power Packs, notification features, and automation options.
Service and Support: LogicMonitor's support team is praised for being helpful, knowledgeable, and responsive. The solution also offers learning resources and ample information to help users navigate and customize the platform. ScienceLogic's customer service is generally considered responsive and professional. However, a few users reported delayed response times and support engineers with limited expertise.
Ease of Deployment: LogicMonitor's initial setup is generally regarded as effortless. Users appreciated the vendor’s help during onboarding and the solution’s extensive documentation. ScienceLogic's initial setup is described as simple and efficient. The deployment process can be completed within a few hours or a couple of weeks.
Pricing: LogicMonitor’s licensing model is based on the size of the environment. It is seen as a high-end solution with a high price tag and may be too costly for smaller organizations. Opinions on the price of ScienceLogic were mixed. Pricing is determined by the number of network devices or endpoints, and there are no hidden charges.
ROI: LogicMonitor users have seen an ROI in the form of increased visibility and shorter resolution times. ScienceLogic improves troubleshooting and minimizes network outages.
Comparison Results: LogicMonitor is a premium solution geared toward large enterprises, featuring smooth integration and advanced AIOps features. Users praised LogicMonitor for its painless setup process and excellent support, but some noted that the solution’s steep price tag might put it out of the range of smaller businesses and that it could improve dashboards and AI capabilities. ScienceLogic is praised for its serverless and agent connectivity, effortless setup, and customized dashboards. However, it lacks detailed documentation and automation options.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The most valuable feature is the visualization of the data that it is collecting. I have used many products in the past and they tend to roll up the data. So, if you're looking at data over long periods of time, they start averaging the data, which can skew the figures that you're looking at. With LogicMonitor, they have the raw data there for two years, if you are an enterprise customer. If you are looking at that long duration of data, you're seeing exactly what happened during that time."
"The alerting would be number one in my book. The thresholds for getting alerts for different criteria are pretty well-thought-out. We don't get many false positives or negatives on the alerting side. If we do get an email alert or some similar alert, we know that it is something that has to be looked at."
"One thing that's very valuable for us is the technical knowledge of the people who work with LogicMonitor. We looked at several products before we decided to use LogicMonitor, and one of the key decision-making points was the knowledge of the things that they put in the product. It provides real intelligence regarding the numbers that you see on the product, which makes it easy for us technical people to troubleshoot. Other products don't provide you with such information. You see a value going up, but you don't know what it means. LogicMonitor provides such information. For instance, if a value goes up, it says that it is probably because your disk area was too low."
"LogicMonitor added AI technology to help understand what's normal and that has helped quite a bit, so that's the feature I found most valuable in the product. The product is also doing quite well with identifying devices and customizing a particular Cisco version or model number. LogicMonitor continues to be active in updating what is available to be monitored, and it's been very good with keeping those things current, so that's another valuable feature of the product."
"The solution’s overall reporting capabilities are pretty powerful compared to ones that I have used previously. It seems like it has a lot of customizations that you can put in, but some of the out-of-the-box reports are useful too, like user logon duration and website latency. Those type of things have been helpful and don't require a lot of, if any, changes to get useful content out of them. They have also been pretty easy to implement and use."
"I really appreciate the reporting function because it allows me to create dashboards that will be emailed to me during the morning so that I have a complete overview of my client's health, within a specific time frame."
"We only have one monitoring tool, and that is LogicMonitor. It does pretty much everything we need under one roof. They are very good at rapidly releasing new features. It's not like we have to wait six months or a year between new features and data sources. There is very quick development. If there is something that doesn't do it for us, I know I can just raise it with support or our delivery representative, and there is a good chance that that will be looked at. If it's not too much effort, we will see it released in the next few months. So, the solution is very good from that perspective. We have everything in LogicMonitor."
"It has improved our organization with its capacity planning. We have a performance environment that we use to benchmark our applications. We use it to say, "Okay, at a certain level of concurrency, we know where our application will fall over." Therefore, we are using LogicMonitor dashboards to tell us that we're good. Our platform can handle X number of clients concurrently hitting us at a time."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"It is simple."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The process of upgrading some of the collectors has been a little bit confusing. I need to understand that better."
"We would like to see more functionality around mapping of topologies, in terms of networks. An improvement that we would like to see is added functionality to get more detail out of mapping. For example, if the LogicMonitor Collector identifies a connection between two network endpoints, it would be great to actually see which ports are connecting the two endpoints together. That functionality is something we greatly desire. It would actually make our documentation more dynamic in the sense that we wouldn't need to manually document. If this is something that the platform could provide, then this would be a great asset."
"It needs better access for customizing and adding monitoring from the repository. That would be helpful. It seems like you have to search through the forums to figure out what specific pieces you need to get in for specific monitoring, if it's a nonstandard piece of equipment or process. You have to hunt and find certain elements to get them in place. If they could make it a bit easier rather having to find the right six-digit code to put in so it implements, that would be helpful."
"Dashboarding capabilities could be enhanced. It is cumbersome, you must do it all at once, and then you must repeat the process every now and then."
"Their Logs feature is quite new. It is not as feature-rich as we would like it to be. There have been a couple of conversations internally around other log management tools, like Splunk, which may do more for us than LM Logs. The benefit of LogicMonitor is that our staff know how to use it, so we don't really want to move away from it, if we don't have to. I fully expect there to be more development in this area. It is their newest feature, so it is understandable that it hasn't evolved as some of the other stuff. It would be good to see a bit more development in this area, but I think the monitoring side of things is spot on."
"There are some very specific things that need improvement in LogicMonitor. One is the lack of formatting for customized alerts, particularly the delivery of them to our email channel. We'd also like to see further customization of dashboards. Finally, something that is specific to us as an MSP that uses LogicMonitor, is white-labeling or skinning of the product, so we can make it look more customer-focused for our customers."
"The topology mapping is all based on the dynamic discovery of devices that could talk to each other. There is no real manual way that you can set up a join between two devices to say, "This is how this network is actually set up." For example, if you have a device, and you're only pinning that device and not getting any real intelligent information from it, then it can't appear on the map with other devices. Or if it can appear, then it won't show you which devices are actually joined to it."
"LogicMonitor should improve its logging features. It can become expensive and should be cost-effective. It would be great to see prebuilt templates for alerting methods in LogicMonitor that are similar to the prebuilt dashboards. Currently, users have to build their alerting configurations."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"Addressing duplicate IPs: There is the ability to edit the DB and fix this, but adding some logic to understand them would be a plus."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"They need a little more self-service."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
LogicMonitor is ranked 17th in Network Monitoring Software with 24 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in Network Monitoring Software with 41 reviews. LogicMonitor is rated 9.0, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of LogicMonitor writes "We went from nothing to full visibility across our internal and external estates of equipment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". LogicMonitor is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, SCOM, Auvik Network Management (ANM) and ThousandEyes, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog, Zabbix and ServiceNow Discovery. See our LogicMonitor vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors, and best AIOps vendors.
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.