No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Apica vs ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apica
Ranking in Log Management
46th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (54th), IT Operations Analytics (14th), Observability Pipeline Software (5th)
ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer
Ranking in Log Management
36th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (42nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of Apica is 0.8%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Log Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer1.2%
Apica0.8%
Other98.0%
Log Management
 

Featured Reviews

PA
Test Automation Specialist -Full Stack at IBM
Recording flows and script enhancements streamline performance testing, but script access limitations and outdated language hinder some functions
Apica allows me to record APIs easily and enhances scripts through options like auto-correlation, enabling me to access dynamic fields. The tool has a test analyzer for clear reporting and downloading PDF reports. It is useful for both performance and automation testing, facilitating access to headers and payloads easily, enhancing scripts with dynamic values.
Md Abdul Hakim - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at Corporate Projukti Limited
Efficient log management enhances activity monitoring despite VPN user issue
Last month, we faced an issue with a Hawaiian VPN user activity. It's like a Fortinet device configured for VPN users. When a VPN user logs in, it doesn't really capture the time before this. If you're testing with existing or new device integration, then the product will be good in the market.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution’s real-time monitoring features have had a huge impact on our service delivery."
"With the ZebraTester, the ability to have and store dynamic variables, when setting up the monitors, means you can extract that value and use it in a subsequent service call. This is something that has made our lives easier... This is one of the features that I like the most because it helps us in configuring these services, in a certain flow, without the need to re-record the whole thing."
"It saves a lot of time by capturing and pinpointing the exact problem that is happening quickly."
"The solution captures all our requests and responses."
"We see the benefit almost every day. It allows us to be alerted whenever there is a store that is not responding properly around the world. We do have a network operation center (NOC) who receives these alerts, immediately checking if everything is okay."
"It is easy to set up and configure."
"One of the biggest advantages of moving to Apica is the ability get to a hybrid model with the architecture in the cloud and our agents on-prem. We also have access to Apica's cloud agent across the globe. That has changed the way that we have our load testing setup at this point. Previously, it was always internal. Now, with this change in the way it is implemented for load testing, we can test anywhere across the globe and from the list of agents available within Apica's cloud. If I don't have an agent available in a second location, it just takes an email to their customer support, then it is spun up within 24 hours. That flexibility has changed the way that we perceive our load tests, not just in the US, but globally."
"From our standpoint, there are a number of valuable features. The WebHooks are obviously really great. The alert framework is really good and then the reporting and visualizations that you get from the dashboards is good. Those three areas are primarily what my team's focused on in terms of usage from day to day."
"It's one of the easiest products. It's very simple to use."
"The support system is very good."
"I have made use of technical support and am certainly very satisfied with them."
"ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer was a lower-cost alternative, and it was easier to install and manage."
"ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer is useful for log and alert correlation and is a full-function SIEM solution."
"We use the solution because it is granular."
"It is stable."
"The user interface is very good."
 

Cons

"Another feature they can improve is related to how easy it is to set up what they call on-premises locations."
"The accuracy of alerts can be improved a little bit. Right now, it's pretty good in terms of alerting pretty quickly about failures or changes in response times. However, what we have seen happen is the number of alerts that we are getting is very frequent, and we would like to tone down the number of alerts. That's the only trouble we have. Apica could tone down those settings because there is no option for us to tone it down to a level that would reduce the alerts to a minimum. As a platform, it does send us good alerts, but it could be improved a bit."
"Apica should add more features and integrations with different tools and certain ticketing systems, like ServiceNow."
"Alerting needs improvement. It's a little noisy. It needs some better options. Currently, they have an issue, when you set up a synthetic monitor, you can set up where it's monitoring from, a data center that Apica owns."
"Apica was a relatively new tool when I started using it. Although Apica had good documentation, it still felt less developed or advanced than a tool like LoadRunner."
"It is difficult to create a script using ZebraTester."
"When it comes to the way the internal agent is installed, because you can install an application on a server, I would love to see the application Docker-ized. If you could install internal agents using Docker or using containers, it would be easier for us to manage them and spin up internal agents."
"Sometimes there's an outage, but it's not frequent."
"The customization of reports could be a lot easier. It is not difficult but it could be made easier."
"The product does not have certain advantages, especially the correlation tools. It was not working as per our expectations."
"There isn't good security integration when it comes to cybersecurity. The correlation of logs isn't so simple."
"The scalability is limited."
"The solution is stable. However, there are limits. For example, we can do 2,500 Syslog events per second, but if we want to do more we have to install the distributor structure, and then we can expand how many events we can do. They could improve the stability."
"The solution should improve on its log capturing capabilities, the authentication, when a person logs onto a network device."
"The first tier of customer service and support is not great, and additional upgrades could be included."
"There's a lot to improve in terms of connectivity. Currently, we're utilizing it across various infrastructures and environments, including others' cloud. However, connecting it to our infrastructure and integrating it with some of our SMAX solutions poses difficulties."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing is not cheap, but it is in the midrange."
"The pricing is fair. It is neither too cheap nor too expensive."
"License management is another area that Apica could do better. We have already had these conversations with our account teams. This is something that they are looking at largely improving in upcoming releases. I believe that this is already on their roadmap."
"I am sure that Apica's price will be lower than LoadRunner."
"Apica is pretty cost-effective if you buy both solutions together: Synthetic and LoadTest. If you are going for one solution, the cost is on par with any tool in the market."
"The level of alerting accuracy has saved us time and money in operational costs. Overall, it has automated a lot of the manual efforts which have been more complex with some of our other scripting tools or monitors. So, it brings things together by doing things faster and saves us money."
"Another main difference between Apica and the other products was the cost. We really thought that the balance in Apica between the features and costs was the best among all the products on which we did a PoC."
"The tool is completely free and open source. I've been using it for about two and a half years and installed it on both my personal and client machines without needing a license. All features are available for use without any hidden fees."
"Licensing for ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer is paid yearly."
"We paid for the license of the solution and the deployment. The price of ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer is less expensive than other solutions."
"ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer is expensive. Its licensing costs are annual."
"ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer is a low-cost solution. It costs approximately $1,000 per month per server for a perpetual license."
"There is a license required for these solutions. The customer can choose the license type, such as an annual license purchase or a perpetual license. If the customer wants maintenance they will have to pay annually."
"There is a yearly subscription for the solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Apica Synthetic?
Apica cannot perform endurance or scale-up tests independently. It requires other tools like ALM. When editing scripts, only one can be accessed at a time, risking changes affecting other folders. ...
What is your primary use case for Apica Synthetic?
I use Apica for performance testing, where I record our flows, enhance our scripts, and add inline code and correlation IDs. This provides dynamic values for execution. I use Apica for automation t...
What advice do you have for others considering Apica Synthetic?
I find Apica challenging to learn initially due to the lack of online training resources besides documentation. It's essential for someone knowledgeable to provide KT sessions. Overall, I rate Apic...
What needs improvement with ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer?
Last month, we faced an issue with a Hawaiian VPN user activity. It's like a Fortinet device configured for VPN users. When a VPN user logs in, it doesn't really capture the time before this. If yo...
What is your primary use case for ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer?
I find this solution useful for IT devices as a live stream to work with Syshun, serving as both the router and the target. All activities are logged, and they can be accessed within one console. T...
 

Also Known As

Apica LoadTest, Apica Synthetic
EventLog Analyzer
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

HBO, JPMC, Morgan Stanley, Xander, EA Sports, Volvo
Moody National Bank, EnCircle, Goldleaf Financial Solutions, Inc, IBM, Ernst & Young, Micro Linear, Silverbeck-Rymer Solicitors, Provincial Court of British Columbia, Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida, OGILVY & MATHER, E! Entertainment, Tribune-Review Publishing Co.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apica vs. ManageEngine EventLog Analyzer and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.