Catchpoint Reviews

My main use case for Catchpoint is that it does an excellent job in identifying the entire traffic patterns from the source to destination, and it also provides suggestions for a better path to reach the service much faster.

A specific example of how I used Catchpoint in my previous organization is that we were primarily using it for monitoring our applications and endpoints in specific regions. We were looking for a BGP workflow where the AS group for a particular provider was a lengthier path than the suggested one. Catchpoint was able to identify the particular AS BGP peers and suggest that if we go through this path, it is the fastest way to reach our packets to our destination. The path we had associated with another ISP took a longer time for a response. These features helped us plan in a way that our monitoring improved, our detection time for a particular incident for that application was significantly improved, and we were able to pinpoint exactly where the problem was and come up with a better solution. Based on the suggestion from Catchpoint, the BGP AS number which was associated with it led us to change to a particular provider, which helped us in many areas like mean time to detect and mean time to recover.

Catchpoint helped improve our numbers, and we were successfully able to integrate it with our internal tool, which gave us the right signal to initiate a war room, get the team on the call, and perform a quick troubleshoot and get those fixed as soon as possible. This helped us in many ways, especially our ability to monitor the services of our own application improved compared to waiting for a customer report. We were able to pick up issues much earlier and resolve them much faster.

Catchpoint has positively impacted my organization through detection and remediation. We were successful in getting it implemented internally, and each trigger whenever Catchpoint detected a problem showed an impact. There was no noise associated with it unless a third-party vendor had a problem and our applications were dependent on it. Overall, the improvement in detection and repair significantly improved. Detection was a major point because many applications take their own infrastructure, have their own operations, and have their own monitoring thresholds set up, but Catchpoint plays a good role in terms of detection.

I can share specific outcomes and metrics that improved after using Catchpoint, such as reduced downtime and faster detection. Previously, we were getting customer reports for about four to five incidents out of ten, where approximately 50 percent were customer reports and 50 percent were internally detected. After using Catchpoint, we were close to 90 percent, where out of ten incidents, just one incident came from a customer, and the remaining were detected by internal sources, especially with Catchpoint. This number helped us in terms of reducing downtime. On average, we would take 20 to 25 minutes to fix an issue, but with Catchpoint, we were able to do it within 10 to 12 minutes on average. That time period of downtime reduction of 18 minutes per incident on average helped us in improving our overall numbers associated with both repair time and detection time.

The best features Catchpoint offers include the entire traffic pattern from the source to destination and the hop-by-hop breakdown of all those patterns, including the BGP peers, which was very significant. Catchpoint operates at multiple known locations, and our data centers are in highly used cases. For example, a few data centers we are in are also associated with it, which gives a better and faster response that generates many use cases where we can review more about how Catchpoint can help us in detecting issues. It also performs a ping check every second or every minute based on how the particular service requires it.

Out of those features, the hop-by-hop breakdown of BGP peers is the one that made the biggest difference in my work because I have not seen this feature in others. Other products exist, but this gives very good visualization in the first place, and it also pinpoints exactly the number of milliseconds a particular path takes. By looking at it, on average, if I look at a dashboard we set up, it can give us a better understanding of where we lack and how we can improve. That decision can be much faster compared to where we would have to dig deeper and analyze with a lot of manual effort required. The dashboard visualization gives us a quicker way to justify, take action, and then we actually see the result much faster.

The visualization is also better overall. I have seen in a dashboard it gives me a quick check of where we are, what we are doing, and then how we are doing it, which helps us a lot.

I think Catchpoint can be improved because it is competitively a little costlier. I understand that Catchpoint provides the best solution, but comparatively, if I compare it with Uptrends, New Relic, DataDog, and ThousandEyes, Catchpoint does multiple things, but it comes with a cost. That is one of the areas you can leverage use cases based on customer requirements and come up with a better pricing model. The existing ones are good, but for our use case from Zoom, we were just looking for our endpoints to be monitored every minute, and that cost us a lot compared to the existing tool that we were using. That area is something to look for improvement.

I have been using Catchpoint for close to four years.

Catchpoint is stable.

Catchpoint does a pretty good job in scaling applications drastically. Based on our use case, the migration part, especially onboarding a new application for monitoring, is seamless and does not require a lot of our effort and analysis. It does scale well.

Support was pretty good with Catchpoint. Integration was seamless. We were onboarded to Catchpoint and started testing within a couple of hours. The visualization was good and the UI was also good. In terms of the breakdown of the BGP paths or the traffic from one location to another, the UI was good. The graphical and pictorial representations of all those traffic patterns were pretty highly useful for somebody looking at it for the first time. One of my peers who was also part of the testing got going within a couple of hours, which was much better.

Customer support was good. The initial migration and the initial days of monitoring Catchpoint involved having a dedicated TAM and a dedicated support number that could give us quick answers. All of our questions were answered much faster, and a dedicated document was prepared for reviewing content. Whenever we had a problem, we looked at that document to get those answers. Beyond that, we could call a number to have the support team available for us.

I was not part of the decision regarding why Catchpoint was brought on. I understood the reasoning, but I did not know which other tool they were using. The use case was straightforward: to detect much faster and accurately.

The initial migration and the initial days of monitoring Catchpoint involved having a dedicated TAM and a dedicated support number that could give us quick answers.

Support was pretty good with Catchpoint. Integration was seamless. We were onboarded to Catchpoint and started testing within a couple of hours.

I have seen a return on investment. We definitely saved time by an incident commander who was monitoring the applications. We used to spend at least 30 to 40 minutes on average on a call to detect what the problem was, but that reduced drastically to around 16 to 18 minutes. That time savings has significantly improved our productivity as well as our better monitoring capability. The cost part where each engineer cost comes with the amount of time spent on an incident call or on a ticket, all three factors were included when we looked into Catchpoint.

I was not part of that decision-making regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing, but as far as I remember, it was pretty good in the early days. I think the cost increased because we were so dependent on Catchpoint for monitoring most of our applications. There was a review check, and after that, I do not remember what the decision was.

We spoke to Uptrends, DataDog, and New Relic before choosing Catchpoint.

I would advise others looking into using Catchpoint to consider that if your use case is more about detecting faster and identifying a root cause, Catchpoint stands as a top contender. It really depends on use cases, especially for someone who has a sensitive application where they want to know every minute if there are transaction failures or login failures. Catchpoint can help you in those areas. I rate Catchpoint highly for organizations with these requirements.

Hybrid Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

My main use case for Catchpoint is synthetic monitoring. We use synthetic monitoring with Catchpoint to monitor the customer journey of our clients on our e-commerce sites, so we can proactively detect failures or errors that could affect our customer experience.

The best features Catchpoint offers include the ability to program many steps in synthetic scripts, create performance reports about my sites, and an easy UI that I can clearly use without any troubles. The easy UI helps me in my daily tasks because it is very easy as a user to create and navigate the Catchpoint interface, and regarding the performance reports, we use them daily to analyze those reports and find out if we need to do some configurations or troubleshooting to improve our sites, ensuring our customers feel good about buying from us and that they complete their journey from the home page login loading to the cart or even the paid page of their cart or product.

I would love to have RAM monitoring available in Catchpoint, which would be a nice feature for both synthetic and real user monitoring, and it would be an amazing tool that I would love to have, complementing each other.

I would like another feature to make it easier to use the report section of Catchpoint. I would appreciate more detailed reports about my sites. Learning how to configure it and what kind of data Catchpoint can generate would help me in my daily tasks, especially with the business part of my enterprise focused on e-commerce.

I have been using Catchpoint for about two years.

Catchpoint is really stable.

We previously tried using Dynatrace, but it was really expensive for us, and when we discovered Catchpoint, we fell in love with it. We evaluated Dynatrace before choosing Catchpoint, but it was too expensive for us, leading to its discharge.

I do not have information right now regarding how much downtime we have prevented, but I believe we have an 85% success rate in detecting website issues before they impact the client, which I think is a good metric.

My team is responsible for monitoring and using Catchpoint to collaborate with the e-commerce support team, so when an alert is triggered on Catchpoint, we use it to report that issue to support, enabling them to troubleshoot before it impacts the client. We efficiently use the historic information in Catchpoint with our architecture team to identify necessary improvements from our provider's infrastructure side, demonstrating how helpful Catchpoint is for us.

My team works closely with incident management, allowing us to detect when an alarm triggers in Catchpoint, so I immediately open an incident with the support team for them to troubleshoot. Catchpoint has helped us improve our response times significantly; previously, we would wait until the customer reported an issue, but now we proactively address performance issues on our sites as soon as they arise.

We evaluated Dynatrace before choosing Catchpoint, but it was too expensive for us, leading to its discharge.

With compliance, we need a monitoring platform for our e-commerce sites, and after some research, we found that our home office in Bentonville uses Catchpoint to monitor a part of their e-commerce sites, so we added it for our market use.

Regarding resource optimization, we are currently reviewing all the performance reports generated by Catchpoint to gather ideas on how to optimize our e-commerce sites and manage costs while maintaining nice site performance.

We are currently using Catchpoint's reports for capacity planning on our e-commerce sites, setting up information to send to our provider to help make decisions about improving infrastructure or identifying issues they might have.

Currently, we do not use Catchpoint for business continuity or disaster recovery plans; we only use it for monitoring.

I do not manage Catchpoint at work, but I have seen that it has passed all our security tests, so I think it has nice governance and security configuration.

I recommend having some training before using Catchpoint, as it has many features that can help users with monitoring, reports, and other activities. If you are looking for a platform or tool that excels in monitoring or synthetic monitoring, I would definitely recommend Catchpoint.

Public Cloud

Other

For Catchpoint, it has been a year since I have been using Catchpoint primarily for monitoring our Atlassian SaaS applications, specifically Jira and Confluence.

Our monitoring focused on several key areas with Catchpoint. First was authentication, where we monitored login flows to ensure users could successfully authenticate. Second was page load performance, where we tracked how long important Jira and Confluence pages took to load. We also monitored functional workflows such as opening projects, navigating spaces, and accessing commonly used pages. Finally, we covered API monitoring to validate that important backend endpoints were available and responding within acceptable thresholds.

We stimulated real user experience by using a service account that would log in to Jira or imitate the login workflow to check if the authentication login workflow is working fine with Catchpoint, and we used a browser-based authentication process.

We primarily use it to monitor Jira and Confluence, including authenticated user journeys, page load performance, functionality, and API endpoints.

We did not have to update Catchpoint monitors very frequently once they were stable. Most changes happened when the applications themselves changed. For example, when Atlassian updated the UI or changed page elements in Jira or Confluence, some of our synthetic monitors had to be adjusted because they relied on specific element locators. We would update the scripts or selectors, test them, and redeploy the monitor. Overall, it was a smooth process, although it did require some maintenance whenever the application changed significantly. Once the updates were made, the monitors continued to work reliably.

When Catchpoint detects an issue, an email triggers to our team distribution list. The first step is for the alert to notify the operations team. We review the alert details and associated metrics to understand whether it is an availability issue, a slowdown in page load, a failed authenticated transaction, or an API performance problem. If the issue is confirmed, we investigate further by checking the affected Jira or Confluence service, correlated with application and infrastructure logs, and determine whether it is a temporary issue or something requiring immediate action. If needed, we escalate it to the appropriate application or infrastructure team. Once the issue is resolved, we verify through Catchpoint that the monitors are healthy again and close the incident.

Overall, Catchpoint met our expectations. We used it to monitor Jira and Confluence, including authenticated user journeys, page load performance, and functionality checks. The monitors are reliable, and the alerts give us early visibility into performance issues before users report them. It also provides enough diagnostic information to help us identify where the shutdown or failure is occurring. For our monitoring requirements, it performs well and meets our needs.

One thing I really appreciate about Catchpoint is its synthetic monitoring capabilities. Instead of waiting for users to report issues, we could stimulate user journeys at regular intervals. That helped us identify slowdowns or failures proactively, especially for business-critical workflows. This aligns well with Catchpoint's focus on synthetic transaction monitoring and proactive digital experience monitoring.

The alerting functionality in Catchpoint provides value. We configure thresholds for response times and failures so that our operations team could be notified whenever authentication failed, APIs became unavailable, or page performance degraded beyond acceptable limits. This reduces the time needed to identify issues and begin troubleshooting. From a usability perspective, I found the dashboards useful for getting a quick overview of application health, making it easy to see trends in availability and response times over time. When an issue occurred, having historical performance data helped determine whether it was a temporary spike or part of a larger pattern.

For example, we have applied alerting on create pages on Confluence. The slowness, even if we have added a response time on our monitors, and if the page does not load in between that time or takes more than the defined time, we would be alerted. That way, we were notified about the issue before even a user responds about the slowness. We have defined thresholds for every page load or workflow in our application.

Catchpoint has positively impacted our organization by providing reliable visibility into performance and availability of our Jira and Confluence environments, giving us confidence that critical user journeys are being continuously monitored. For an organization that relies heavily on SaaS applications and wants proactive monitoring instead of waiting for end-users' complaints, I think it is a solid solution.

The improved response time is noticeable since using Catchpoint.

For some larger workflows, I think the product could improve in a few areas. As the number of synthetic tests grows, managing them can become more complex, so that is the area I believe Catchpoint can really focus on to improve how we can have better visibility even with multiple synthetic tests.

I also think simplifying the investigation workflow when drilling down into failures could make troubleshooting faster.

The reason it is not a full ten, or why I rated it eight, are mainly around ease of managing larger monitoring environments and making troubleshooting workflows a little more streamlined.

To be transparent, I did not directly use Catchpoint's AI capabilities, so I cannot comment from hands-on experience about its governance or security. My work focuses on synthetic monitoring, but I was not involved in evaluating or confirming any specific governance features, so I prefer not to speculate beyond my actual experience.

I have been working as a Cloud DevOps engineer for five years and managing the Atlassian platform.

I have not seen significant downtime or reliability issues with Catchpoint.

I would rate Catchpoint's scalability around eight out of ten. It comfortably supports our growing monitoring requirements, although I do not have first-hand experience with very large-scale global deployments.

Catchpoint's customer support is really helpful. I have talked to them and logged support tickets, and they would invest in it and escalate your issues. The experience was really great with them.

I would rate the customer support nine out of ten, as if they did not have the solution because of Catchpoint's limitation, they would fairly give alternatives or make the monitor work. They would literally write Playwright for you if you cannot get the element right.

We were previously using DataDog, but since we moved to the SaaS solution and needed browser-based monitoring because we do not have any instances or resources on-premise, we switched to Catchpoint as a solution.

I would say the initial implementation of Catchpoint is moderately straightforward. The basic setup is fairly easy, but configuring meaningful synthetic monitors, especially for authenticated user journeys in Jira and Confluence, requires some planning and testing. We have to make sure the authentication page flows, page validates, and API checks accurately reflect real user behavior. Once those monitors are in place, ongoing maintenance is minimal, and the platform is reliable. Overall, I would not call it difficult, but there is a learning curve to getting the most value from its features.

I was not the primary administrator for Catchpoint, so I was not heavily involved in managing user access or permissions. From my perspective as a user, I had the access needed to create and manage monitors, review dashboards, and investigate alerts. We did not run into any issues with permissions during my day-to-day work, so it seemed flexible enough for our team's needs.

We did not track formal ROI metrics, but Catchpoint helped us save time by identifying performance issues early and reducing troubleshooting effort. I cannot provide specific numbers, but it improved our operational efficiency.

Catchpoint was already being used by our organization, so we did not evaluate other options. We compared it with DataDog and found Catchpoint better.

The reporting and analytics in Catchpoint are useful for our monitoring needs. We primarily use the dashboards and performance reports to track page load times, authenticated transactions, and API response times for Jira and Confluence. When an alert is triggered, the metrics help us understand whether the issue is related to authentication, page performance, or an API endpoint, which makes troubleshooting more efficient. The dashboard provides enough visibility for our operations team to identify trends and investigate performance issues over time. While we did not use Catchpoint as a business analytics tool, its reporting was valuable from an operational and performance monitoring perspective.

Catchpoint's AI capabilities are great, and while I have not explored that feature as of yet, the visibility I have around it is good. The governance is intact, and it does give you the required information and helps you set up monitors more easily.

My advice to others looking into using Catchpoint would be to start by identifying your most critical user journeys and business transactions before implementing it. Focus on monitoring the workflows that have the biggest impact on your users. Spend some time designing those synthetic monitors properly, because that is where you will get the most value. Also, be prepared to update monitors occasionally when the application UI changes. For example, we have to make adjustments when Atlassian changed elements in Jira and Confluence. Once everything is configured, Catchpoint provides reliable monitoring and proactive alerts that help identify performance issues before users are affected. I have rated this review eight out of ten.

Private Cloud

Other

My main use case for Catchpoint is to check website availability in different regions so that we can be aware of any downtimes.

A specific example of how I have used Catchpoint to check website availability is when we check DNS propagation. We analyze how it is working and which locations it has propagated because sometimes clients reach out to us that a website is not available in a certain location, which could be due to DNS propagation. Catchpoint helps with those pain points, and we also use it to monitor when a website struggles on the CDN.

In my opinion, one of the best features Catchpoint offers is the detailed alerting, which not only points out outages but also provides a lot of information in the alerts.

I find the alerting details helpful because, working for hosting organizations, it is tough to identify issues due to third-party providers, such as a CDN. The alerts contain all the details, such as when a website is failing to load due to a CDN issue, such as a 503 error at the CDN.

I think Catchpoint helps us detect issues before anybody could report them, which can impact clients because it provides prior monitoring that also sees outside the infrastructure, meaning outside the backend.

Catchpoint positively impacts our organization by helping us build customer trust, as customers do not care if the issue comes from the backend or our infrastructure. It allows us to determine issues that are not related to our services, which builds good trust with customers, and they know we are working on downtimes.

I believe Catchpoint's accuracy and reliability of output is impressive because it finds issues before anyone else does. Even if a website viewer identifies a problem, Catchpoint has good global coverage on outages and checks application statuses continuously, reporting them immediately.

Catchpoint has good scalability and is stable.

Catchpoint is very great software for troubleshooting APIs, websites, availability, and other third-party services such as CDNs, which makes it stand out.

I think Catchpoint should have licensing models for individuals or very small organizations, and there is no auto-tuning for alerts, so auto-tuning features for alerts would be beneficial.

I have been using Catchpoint for around two years.

Catchpoint is stable.

Catchpoint has good scalability and is stable.

I have not interacted with customer support. I read the documentation for monitoring details instead.

I did not previously use a different solution.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing is that you just need to buy the licenses, and the team sends you the license keys, which is pretty easy. I am not sure about cost-effectiveness because that was decided by the organization, as I was the monitoring person.

I believe we see a good return on investment with Catchpoint because you only need one or two people to monitor, so you do not need a larger team. This way, the license count is also reduced, and you build customer trust, which we market as a feature; that is what our organization did, indicating a positive ROI.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing is that you just need to buy the licenses, and the team sends you the license keys, which is pretty easy. I am not sure about cost-effectiveness because that was decided by the organization, as I was the monitoring person.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing Catchpoint.

My advice to others looking into using Catchpoint is that if they need to check third-party services, they should consider buying it. Otherwise, if it is related to the infrastructure, they may not need to consider it, but it is pretty reliable for other services. I would rate this review a 9.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

My main use case for Catchpoint is mostly automating. I use Catchpoint automatically for automated monitoring of our various UIs and also the backend APIs. We rely on Chrome and Selenium and JavaScript automation type.

Catchpoint offers great features, including web browser testing, UI testing, API testing, and many other good features.

We find ourselves mostly using Playwright JavaScript and Chrome-based UI testing, which stands out the most for us.

Catchpoint has impacted my organization positively by speeding up the process in detecting issues much earlier, even before the business reaches out. I can now detect issues almost two hours earlier than what it used to take from the field.

Catchpoint can be improved by supporting some of the APIs and other technical testing with some kind of metric validations as well. I do not have anything more to add about the needed improvements, particularly related to UI or reporting.

I have been working in my current field for almost eight years now.

Catchpoint is stable.

Catchpoint's scalability is good; it can clearly detect any kind of performance issues, and you can spin up new VMs or instances if required.

The customer support for Catchpoint is really good; they get you on the call and will assist you if you are mixed up or blocked with some kind of coding. I would rate the customer support a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10.

We used Blue Prism previously, and Blue Prism was more time-consuming in terms of developing; that is why we leveraged Catchpoint.

I have seen a return on investment, and I think it saves everything in terms of money and time, as we are using it on a day-to-day basis.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that I am not directly involved in pricing, but the pricing is very decent.

Before choosing Catchpoint, we have not leveraged other options; we just use Catchpoint.

I would advise others looking into using Catchpoint to start leveraging it if they have not started already. I would rate this review a 9 out of 10.

Hybrid Cloud

Other

My main use case for Catchpoint is to observe anomalies in the infrastructure. For example, when server memory gets exhausted, Catchpoint sends us a notification, and then we react to it and solve the issue. I use Catchpoint for multiple infrastructure alerts such as CPU, RAM, IOPS, and any application down, so I rely on it for multiple purposes.

Catchpoint has positively impacted my organization because we have supported multiple customers and handled many escalations before they became critical issues. Catchpoint alerted us with the defined threshold, and we solved the problems before they escalated. We have seen a reduction in escalations, and apart from that, we have saved our SLAs.

The best feature that Catchpoint offers me is a dashboard to monitor all anomalies on one page. What I appreciate most about the dashboard is that the color coding itself highlights the failures and running services, which is great. The customization is easy, and the connection between it and outside tools is seamless, so those are the good things about Catchpoint.

Catchpoint is working fine. I believe the connection with Snowflake, AWS, and other new upcoming AI tools should be easier, especially the configuration with AI tools and LLMs.

I have been using Catchpoint specifically for four years.

Catchpoint is stable.

Catchpoint's scalability is good; it can be increased as per the requirement, and updating the license for the number of users is easy to do in Catchpoint.

Catchpoint's customer support is good, and they are very responsive.

Previously, we used Zabbix, and we found that Zabbix had some limitations; that's why I moved on to Catchpoint.

I have seen a return on investment; it is time saved and money saved.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing is good, and the licensing is also good; that's why we opted for Catchpoint.

Before choosing Catchpoint, I evaluated other options such as OP5.

Regarding Catchpoint's AI capabilities, the governance and security are really high and can be defined as per the different policies and processes of the company. I have not worked on the AI solution of Catchpoint. I would definitely recommend Catchpoint to others. I gave this review a rating of 9.

On-premises

We are using this for an eCommerce product for live customers. This is used to monitor business performance, checking if customers are able to make payments on time or if they encounter issues during online shopping. If there are issues in a specific market, we can monitor the entire country and identify the frequency of issues. We wait for 15 minutes and, if the frequency increases, we take quick action.

One of the features, the scatter plot, is very useful. It shows red dots wherever there are issues. Another feature is regional filtering, which allows us to filter the market based on risk. For instance, suppose we want to identify issues in all markets over the last twenty-four hours. These are the two features we use most frequently.

As part of the improvement, there are certain categories, like for the China market, where we face issues. We are currently using an external tool, Splunk, for reporting. If we could receive similar data for the China market as we do for North America and Asia Pacific, this would be helpful.

I have used the solution for around four years.

So far, we have not found any issues. During business hours, it has worked absolutely fine without any issues.

I haven't reached out to technical support so far, so I'm not sure about it. I did not contact anyone in Catchpoint technical team.

The initial setup is very simple. There is no complexity in that.

We have Grafana, which is a tool for monitoring at the functional level. However, this functional level is not available in Catchpoint.

Overall, for Catchpoint, my advice is if there is any plan for improvement, it would be helpful, and maybe the number of users will increase. I would give a rating of seven out of ten.

Public Cloud

Our DevOps and our development team used Catchpoint exclusively for synthetic testing of API and URL endpoints. Our DevOps team is like a composite team for the solution users. Their job was to operate the tool and build the test, and they were the primary folks using it daily. 

The developers used Catchpoint for pre-production testing to ensure that the tests ran and gave them the needed data. They made improvements to the systems that were being monitored. We had around 100 users on the whole platform. The third group was my team, the platform owners. We were in there running daily reports. 

When we started, it was pretty light because we were trying to evolve our thinking, and then it grew. The contract was renegotiated when I was leaving, and we were increasing the test count even higher than we had, indicating a higher level of interest in what we could get out of it. 

Catchpoint is a natively built cloud. There are also ways to deploy an agent internally for tests that sit behind firewalls and internal systems, but the platform is definitely SaaS.

Integration is essential. We can tell what's going on in our infrastructure and all the other events in our environments simultaneously. Our hand-built, in-house integration solution had a lot of overhead. at the same time, Catchpoint was essentially ready out of the box. We only need to configure a connector. That was a huge win. 

Also, our outside-in tests from our previous provider would trigger an alert. Someone would look at that test failure and say, "Well, the site's up. What's wrong here?" We couldn't eliminate ourselves as the culprit. We couldn't tell if it was being routed through an entirely different AS across the internet because someone between us and the test site has a provider issue.

Catchpoint helped us establish that something is in a provider network, so we could tell our customers to check their internet provider because the traffic is not getting to us. You need to be gentle when you tell them that, but the fact that we could do it was crucial.

Catchpoint's UI is well designed, which was a major selling point for us. It's easy to get the visibility you want. The essential piece for us was the external integration with other tools. We needed to get alerts and test result data into other systems we utilized to roll up that information about how our enterprise was working. 

Lastly, we appreciate the visibility Catchpoint gives us into the provider networks we were traversing when our test ran from an endpoint in a data center to our internal applications.

There's still too much manual involvement in getting customized test configurations out there. It's good, but it still takes a lot of effort. In other words, it's when you need to configure it to collect a specific variable and that kind of thing. 

The other issue is the cost. The more data you collect, the more expensive it becomes. You sell your organization by saying we can get this feature set, but then you have to walk that back because we'll need more money to run every test.

This is something hard to get out in your initial scoping. You provide Catchpoint with a series of tests and get a cost estimate, not realizing all the data you might have to collect long term. That was a big deal for us because we partly switched on the promise of saving money. 

I no longer Catchpoint, but I used it for approximately a year and a half.

Catchpoint is incredibly reliable. I rate the stability 10 out of 10.  

SaaS products are built for scalability, so you never see the infrastructure behind them. The only limitation on scalability is the on-prem element, but honestly, you could CI/CD pipeline that and remove the scalability question there. 

We never got around to it when I was there, but it's all on the customer to do that. If you're looking at it from the perspective of the core product, it's entirely scalable. I would rate Catchpoint 10 out of 10 for scalability.

I love Catchpoint support. I'd rate them 10 out of 10. They're incredibly easy to work with, and you don't need to go through layers of bureaucracy to get to people who can answer your questions. I'm connected to their CEO on LinkedIn, and I communicate with him occasionally to let him know how things are going. We never had a problem getting the answers we needed, including post-sales.

Before Catchpoint, we had a custom-scripted integration solution. We switched because it was cheaper, integration was more straightforward, and the UI was better. We were trying to create a UX that hadn't existed before because we understood the need to evolve. We felt we could lower the cost, and Catchpoint would allow us to see into provider networks. 

Ironically, we ended up disabling a lot of that functionality because it became too expensive. Ultimately, we only selected basic tests to stay under our budget. But in the beginning, it was a reason we switched.

It wasn't the only reason, but we had a significant visibility issue with China. We didn't have good node coverage in China with our previous provider. The third reason relates to integration. We needed to seamlessly put products together and have them tell our end-to-end story.

One of our goals was to transition away from managing by exception to actually utilizing the tool. That's why UI became so important. It was the first time we could get teams to use it proactively. It wasn't just, "Oh, there's an alert. Let me go into the console. Okay, yeah. I know what that is. Let's go fix it."

I rate Catchpoint a solid eight out of 10 for ease of deployment. We migrated somewhere around 2,000 tests in less than a month. While it took us a few weeks, we migrated a ton of stuff in that 30 days.

I don't know if it is standard per se, but we had a project manager assigned to our migration. You tell them the tool you're moving from. We didn't pay any extra for this other than what was already in the contract. 

We told them, "Here are the types of tests we have, and this is what we need them to be." We provided them with technical guidance for questions about the tests because some things don't convert directly. 

There were times when they would reach out to us and say, "Okay. What about this group of tests? What were you trying to do here?" They helped us a lot with the conversion. We had to do very little in-house.

Abandoning the old solution involved switching tools and transitioning from our custom integration. I look at that holistically. Without either one of those being optimized, there would be problems.

We could deploy a test around 25 to 30 percent faster with Catchpoint than we could before them. Their test-writing language for complex cases needed work, but it was still better than we had. I can't even put a number on the ability to detect whether we were looking at a provider issue or our problem. We couldn't automate it. :

We could eventually triage and troubleshoot it, but we couldn't see it in real-time. That was a considerable return on investment. The ability to definitively tell a customer that the issue is on their end is invaluable because it helps us talk them down off a cliff. The capacity to identify those issues regionally, nationally, and globally was an unbelievable return on our investment.

The pricing is based on consumption and works on a point scale. For example, let's say I want to look at www.google.com, and I'm going to test it to see if it's there. It will bring back all this data that tells me how long it took to connect and how long it took to get the first byte. It will list all the resources on the page, showing that they all work and there are no broken links.

It brings that data back. That test has an assigned point value depending on what you decide to extract from that test. If all I do is check to see whether it's available, it might be one point. I don't know the exact point values off-hand. This is just an example.

If I decide to add performance checking and all those time metrics I just mentioned, that might be 1.5. It'll slap on an extra 0.5 because you're pulling back more data and taxing their systems further. You can add screenshots. What did it see at this point? What they call snippets in some tools. That typically adds another point or more in some cases because that is very intensive. 

Using google.com as an example, if I have the test login for me, that's a step in the test. It also gets a point value because each action can have all the same data recorded. A multi-step or transaction-based test could cost you seven or eight points every time it runs. You buy an allotment of points up front. And as you consume those points, your balance goes down until you run out.

You buy an allotment of points for a year on a contract with the expectation that you have planned your tests and what you expect to do with them. They will give you a rounded estimate, and you negotiate the price of your contract based on the points you buy. They are tiered, so you will get better deals as you put more testing into the system. Smaller contracts tend to be more expensive per point than larger contracts where you get volume discounts.

The price is reasonable, but we didn't save as much as we'd hoped. When we pitted them against Dynatrace, our Dynatrace sales guy was ready to negotiate. It's like buying a used car. We didn't save a ton, but we felt like the feature set we got kind of made up for that.  

Value-wise, ThousandEyes would've saved us almost 40 percent, but there were a couple of hangups with that product that my leadership was unwilling to overlook. I thought they were minor, especially considering we're always trying to save money. However, the leadership of the DevOps team decided it wasn't worth saving that much money."

Ironically, ThousandEyes is now priced higher than Catchpoint. They have tried to regain our business, but now they're more expensive. There's an ebb and flow. If they're trying to get new business, they will probably treat you better than they do if you're an ongoing customer.

I give Catchpoint three out of five for affordability because they're transparent, there's no haggling, and they're willing to undercut anybody else in the industry. I don't think there's anything special about their pricing model. I don't believe that they're particularly insanely fair. It's more of a you-get-what-you-pay-for type thing.

It's not easy to figure out the point scale, but there are built-in tools to quickly simulate a test and determine what it will cost. I think they are highly transparent. I don't remember there being a single hidden fee. There is a cost if you attempt on-prem testing, but no mysteries there. 

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. 

I give Catchpoint eight out of 10. It's excellent software, but when I start thinking of quality software, it's not the first thing that comes to mind. Depending on your cost model, I would've recommended ThousandEyes before they increased their prices. I don't think it's overwhelmingly good, but it's a solid eight.

My advice to Catchpoint users is to know your tests. You will struggle when they're trying to estimate your point usage. Ultimately, we had to disable several features because we had poorly calculated that. Plan for increased adoption because you can buy more points ad hoc, but they're not as cheap as buying them up front. At the same time, don't overbuy because anything unused is wasted.

Public Cloud

Other

We're using Catchpoint for monitoring activities. From a user perspective, we're using the tool to monitor online shopping customers and support global customers. Suppose customers face issues when purchasing, we get alerts from Catchpoint. Wherever there are red alerts, there are issues in specific markets, so these are the notifications we receive in Catchpoint. Through the tool, we can further drill down to see the flows we need to validate, and we can also see the input parameters the customers are using. We can also use Catchpoint to get test data in real time and validate those quickly.

There are scatter plots in the tool where there are frequent drops or frequent notifications for specific markets, so we can just go over the scatter plots, see the time duration where we can identify, for particular markets, that the drops are consistent, and that would mean there aren't critical issues going on, so based on that information, we can take the actions we need.

The best feature in Catchpoint is the alert or the notification my company gets frequently, in particular, every five minutes. It's the notification you get whenever a respective market has an issue. There's also a dashboard in Catchpoint that shows the markets you support, so all the markets will be highlighted graphically in the dashboard whenever there's downtime that could affect you. If there's no issue for a specific market, it will be in green, so in this way, anybody would be able to understand which market has issues and which market has no issues through Catchpoint.

The tool is very useful for monitoring activities.

A room for improvement in Catchpoint is that it lacks an automated page updating feature. My company receives all the alerts and notifications it needs, but the page doesn't update automatically. You need to manually refresh the page, so every five minutes you need to refresh it to see the most updated information. If there's an automated page refresh feature, that would help my company. It's a feature that Grafana has. The page auto-refreshes in Grafana, so you don't have to manually refresh the page. If that feature is implemented in Catchpoint, it'll be useful for the users.

Another area for improvement in the tool is you have to do a manual task, for example, when you have a notification for a market, you get a zip code that the user could have entered, but if the zip code is incorrect, you have to manually go into Catchpoint and update that parameter, so that manual step is another area in the tool that needs improvement.

I've been using Catchpoint for around one year or so.

Catchpoint is a stable solution.

Catchpoint is a scalable solution.

If we have any issues with Catchpoint, we have a separate team we directly communicate with, and they are very quick with their response.

The initial setup for Catchpoint isn't complex. It's straightforward. The deployment was handled by a separate team, so I'm unsure of how long the process took.

I don't have any idea on the pricing information for Catchpoint.

I'm using the latest version of Catchpoint.

At the moment, twelve people from the production support team use Catchpoint within the company.

My company plans to continue using the tool, and there's no plan to change it to a different tool.

My advice to others who want to start using Catchpoint is that it's more useful for eCommerce businesses, and if you want to use it, it's a very, very helpful tool because it captures data from end-to-end. It will entirely capture online shopping processes, so it's a very useful tool.

My rating for Catchpoint is eight out of ten.

I'm a user of Catchpoint.

Currently, our organization is adopting Asawari principles. We are using Catchpoint as a marketing tool. 

We create automation scripts for our applications. Those scripts are running in Catchpoint, enabling us to hit different geolocations, ensuring that prospective customers are reliable when they come to our sites.

Catchpoint provides the data for our internal dashboard which shows us the reliability of the customer.

Catchpoint's customer service and support are valuable. They are available and able to help us whenever we need extra features. They are clear with respect to what they can or cannot do.

I like that you can record the sessions, and you are able to test the transaction type, web-based and API based. They provide the raw APIs to pull the data. 

Catchpoint's new user interface has a lot of new features enabled and many more functionalities than previous versions.

Catchpoint has placed backbone nodes in different locations. There is a page called the nodes' status page where you can check the status of the nodes. The challenge we have faced is that sometimes our backbone nodes go down due to some technical issue, it could be due to the carriers or the vendors, we have to go to that page and subscribe to that location. We have asked Catchpoint to provide us with notifications through API so that we don't have to manually go and see the page to make the changes to the script. By providing this notification automatically through API, we can switch the nodes.

Currently, Catchpoint is migrating to a new user interface. My colleagues and I feel that the old user version was better, it was more user-friendly. For example, the new user interface does not allow you to resize certain resolutions. 

I have been using Catchpoint for the past three years.

This solution is stable, particularly this past year. We run different kinds of tests, transactions and API where we felt some difficulties, but they have a different patch of releases that are addressing each concern one by one. 

Catchpoint is scalable. They have acquired a lot of data centers across the United States. We have over 300 daily users of the solution in our organization. The majority of the users are quality analysts and developers.

When we started using Catchpoint there were not many features and low functionality from our project perspective. We continuously work with customer service and support, and they help us whenever we need any extra features. 

Catchpoint has a very professional service team. They can help you with the scripting and other functionalities. They have a dedicated network team, so if you face any issues with the geolocations on the nodes or anything related to the network, there is dedicated support available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. 

When considering the technical scripting perspective, I would rate their customer service and support a five out of five. If we are talking about the network side, I would rate them a four out of five. On the network side, they will analyze your ticket. The analysis requires them to take more time, delaying the resolution of your concern.

Positive

The initial setup of Catchpoint is easy. They have all the manuals in the subscription page. By going through the documentation, it is very easy to set up. 

When doing the scripting part, you have all the main functionalities that can be used in Catchpoint. The script development is already there for you to go through and utilize.

Overall, I would rate the initial setup of Catchpoint a five out of five.

The license agreement our company purchased came with a certain process requiring you to go through their site and register with your corporate email ID. Once you register, an email is auto-generated that includes the procedure needed to follow for set up.

Technically speaking, we are seeing improvements.

Overall, I would rate Catchpoint an eight out of 10.