Apica vs Microsoft Purview Audit comparison

Apica and Microsoft are both solutions in the Log Management category. Apica is ranked #17 with an average rating of 7.7, while Microsoft is ranked #31 with an average rating of 8.3. Apica holds a 0.6% mindshare in Log Management, compared to Microsoft’s 0.9% mindshare. Additionally, 81% of Apica users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

Apica

Read 11 Apica reviews

2,103 Views
883 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

Microsoft Purview Audit

Read 4 Microsoft Purview Audit reviews

1,417 Views
992 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Apica

Microsoft Purview Audit

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Apica and Microsoft Purview Audit compete in the performance monitoring and auditing category. Apica holds an advantage in customer support and cost-effectiveness, while Microsoft Purview Audit leads with its robust auditing features.

Features: Apica is recognized for its reliable monitoring, strong alerting system, and cost-effectiveness. Microsoft Purview Audit excels in audit log management, detailed reporting, and regulatory compliance features.

Room for Improvement: Apica could improve its analytics capabilities, simplify configuration processes, and enhance documentation. Microsoft Purview Audit users seek more intuitive access to features, improved documentation, and easier configuration adjustments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Apica is praised for straightforward deployment and a responsive support team. Microsoft Purview Audit, although complex to deploy, provides comprehensive support once set up properly.

Pricing and ROI: Apica is noted for competitive pricing and high ROI through effective monitoring. Microsoft Purview Audit, despite higher initial setup costs, demonstrates consistent ROI in compliance-driven sectors.

To learn more, read our detailed Apica vs. Microsoft Purview Audit Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Apica vs. Microsoft Purview Audit

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,933 peers since 2012

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

17th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (19th), IT Operations Analytics (7th), Observability Pipeline Software (2nd)

Microsoft Purview Audit

Ranking in Log Management

31st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

5.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Microsoft Security Suite (29th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of Apica is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Audit is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Log Management Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Apica	0.6%
Microsoft Purview Audit	0.9%
Other	98.5%

Log Management

Featured Reviews

Noorul Mustafa Khan

Senior Associate Vice President at Wells Fargo

Validates content and perform login functionalities on front-end applications

First of all, it will depend on the type of application. If it's a web application, I would recommend implementing it in your lower environment first and checking for functionality. If you are satisfied, then push it to the higher environments. Apica has detected server-related issues and various web application-related issues promptly, alerting us in a timely manner. This allowed us to implement automation within our processes, ensuring comprehensive performance monitoring from failure detection to recovery. It was pretty easy to learn. I attended a couple of sessions with team members. They provided knowledge transfer, which took about a week. After that, I was able to onboard the company. However, for minor issues, I would still contact them. If you're a quick learner, it could take just a couple of weeks to get the hang of it. You can integrate Apica architect into your system because they provide APIs. With these APIs, you can utilize Apica where and when it's needed. For instance, you can create your own microservices to automate tasks or integrate it with tools like Postman. This flexibility allows you to embed Apica into various automation processes or any other functionalities you require. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Read full review

Oksana Kosukhina.

Cloud Solution Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

Integrated auditing has strengthened data retention and improved incident investigations

I have seen areas for improvement, specifically in Microsoft Purview Audit or in general about Microsoft. I have had a situation with documentation. I had a customer who wanted to create alerts and they had Microsoft 365 Business Premium. In the documentation, it was noted that this license is enough for creating alerts. When we tried to make them, we noticed they cannot do it with Microsoft 365 E3 because the customer had limited features to manage alerts. The customer had to buy E3. We created Microsoft support requests, and they confirmed that the documentation displayed not the real situation and they have been going to update documentation. The same situation occurred now with implementing Microsoft Purview Audit in the last autumn. eDiscovery was combined with search and content search, and the documentation was not clear at the beginning. It was a little difficult to describe to customers that now it is a part of eDiscovery. Content search is a very simple functionality, while eDiscovery is a little difficult. I am not entirely sure why Microsoft is going in the way of combining these services because they are the same. However, for a customer who has never seen these services, it is difficult to understand quickly. The same situation occurs with litigation holds and some other holds. For any mail, I am trying to keep data. For example, emails are held for a year or two years, ten years, it does not matter. It is difficult to understand where to find this data and where these emails are being held. I need to use eDiscovery to find out all deleted data that was kept somewhere in some hidden folders of the mailbox. Regular customers and regular administrators know that on-premises Exchange, for example, allows them to find the data in some repository and review the list of kept data. However, with this hold, we do not have any functionality to review the list of kept data. It is difficult to understand for customers how to work with this. I had a case where I spent three or four hours working deeply with a customer to explain how to work with eDiscovery, why Content Search is not there when it was before, what is an eDiscovery case, and why we are talking about all of this just to review a list of kept emails. This is difficult.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is easy to set up and configure."

"The solution captures all our requests and responses."

"Our application SREs do script checks in such a way that closely mimic our customers' actions using the platform. Because there are so many different ways and options to be able to configure checks to closely mirror your applications' capabilities, it provides a lot of optionality for teams to create the right type of check that can notify when there are any issues. At the end of the day, we want our monitoring tools to be able to catch any outage before our customers do. This is where Apica Synthetic does a great job."

"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."

"Anyone can understand the solution easily because it doesn't require a specific scripted language."

"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 helps with releases because we monitor them in staging. We can tell if something is critically wrong before it gets into production, e.g., if it was load related or function related and also what was different in the dev stage. It then alerts us straightaway inside of our production monitors once it has been released. Therefore, it has improved how we run our systems since we monitor multiple environments."

"There are several features that are really good. The first one is the flexibility and the advanced configuration that Apica offers when it comes to configuring synthetic checks. It provides the ability to customize how the check should be performed and it is very flexible in the number of synthetic locations that it can use. It allows us to run scripts from different locations all over the world, and they have a really good number of these locations."

More Apica pros

"The overall user experience with Microsoft Purview Audit is of higher quality than when it was branded as Compliance Center, and Microsoft consistently updates and evolves functionalities and the overall experience."

"The main Microsoft feature is that it offers common integration of services, of data, of identity, meaning user accounts, user access, and privileged access."

"The platform has significantly enhanced our operational insight into the overall Microsoft 365 environment."

"We're easily saving at least one hour per day using this solution."

Cons

"The having to install an application on your desktop to utilize something like ZebraTester is a little cumbersome. It would be nice to see that become a web-based application. Having the documentation a little more accessible, and easier to digest by people who are just learning how to use the framework, especially when it comes to more complex or more edge-based cases would be really helpful to have."

"If you are adding any input file, the tool fails to capture the path."

"There are some components of the user interface that are not up to date. Just to give you an idea, today we have web applications that are called single-page applications that are much faster than the old style of web application. If we can move faster into the flow of the graphic user interface, and in a more effective way, it will save us a lot of time."

"It is difficult to create a script using ZebraTester."

"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."

"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 cannot perform endurance or scale-up tests independently."

"Learning the tool has always been a little difficult from a scripting perspective because the framework is proprietary and unique. Once we became used to what it does and how to perform it, then it became easier for my team and me. I would like to see some of the testing steps be part of a more well-known language, like Java or Python. That would be a big improvement."

More Apica cons

"Areas for product improvement include enhancing customization options and integrating more comprehensive compliance features."

"We do have a Denial of Access happening."

"I had a case where I spent three or four hours working deeply with a customer to explain how to work with eDiscovery, why Content Search is not there when it was before, what is an eDiscovery case, and why we are talking about all of this just to review a list of kept emails."

"We are still in the early stages of leveraging Microsoft Purview Audit. Currently, it's primarily used for the audit function."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"The pricing is very reasonable, but it is not cheap."

"I am sure that Apica's price will be lower than LoadRunner."

"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."

"The product is less expensive compared to LoadRunner."

"The solution's pricing is not cheap, but it is in the midrange."

"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."

More Apica pricing and cost advice

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Comms Service Provider

Outsourcing Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Comms Service Provider

Energy/Utilities Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	17

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apica Synthetic?

The GUI is powerful and doesn't require scripting or regular expressions. It has a vast finder for correlation, which is easier than other tools like JMeter and LoadRunner. It's also easy to integr...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apica Synthetic?

I know Apica is an expensive solution, but it is worth the money for the service it provides.

See all answers

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. ...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Purview Audit?

It is not so expensive in comparison with other products, but I can tell you about an example.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Audit?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Audit?

I work with Defender for IoT by chance because I see that we have enough reviews for Defender for Office 365 today, and we need reviews for some Azure products. I work with Azure products such as L...

See all answers

Comparisons

Datadog vs Apica

Compared 7% of the time

Cribl vs Apica

Compared 7% of the time

Dynatrace vs Apica

Compared 6% of the time

Splunk AppDynamics vs Apica

Compared 6% of the time

Splunk Observability Cloud vs Apica

Compared 6% of the time

More Apica Competitors

eSentire MDR for Log vs Microsoft Purview Audit

Compared 15% of the time

Cisco Secure Email and Web Manager vs Microsoft Purview Audit

Compared 9% of the time

SolarWinds Kiwi Syslog Server vs Microsoft Purview Audit

Compared 7% of the time

Sumo Logic Security vs Microsoft Purview Audit

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Purview eDiscovery vs Microsoft Purview Audit

Compared 5% of the time

More Microsoft Purview Audit Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Apica

March 2026

Download Apica product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Purview Audit

March 2026

Download Microsoft Purview Audit product report

Also Known As

Apica LoadTest, Apica Synthetic

No data available

Overview

Apica leads in observability cost optimization, empowering IT teams to manage telemetry data economics efficiently. It supports various data types, reducing costs by 40% with flexible deployment options and eliminating tool sprawl through modular solutions.

Apica Ascent optimizes observability costs across metrics, logs, traces, and events and provides adaptability beyond proprietary formats. Its patented InstaStore™ technology ensures maximum storage efficiency and advanced root cause analysis. Organizations leverage Apica for comprehensive control over observability investments, reducing runaway costs. With solutions for mitigating high-cardinality data challenges, Apica supports any data lake preference and offers cloud or on-premises deployments. Its modular solutions eliminate unnecessary tool redundancies, enhancing economic efficiency in telemetry data management.

What features define Apica's capabilities?

Global Presence: Extensive points of presence worldwide
Advanced Alerting: Accurate system notifications
Robust Scripting: Supports multiple protocols easily
Flexible Integration: Effortless system connections
Environment Simulation: Adapts various test scenarios globally

Which benefits should users expect from Apica?

Cost Efficiency: Reduces observability costs by 40%
Data Flexibility: Supports any data source
Modular Approach: Eliminates tool redundancies
Advanced Analysis: Enhanced root cause capabilities
Deployment Variety: Cloud and on-premises options available

Apica addresses industry needs in monitoring and testing applications, enhancing user experience across sectors. It is instrumental in synthetic checks, load testing, API monitoring, and validating functionalities for stability in gaming, finance, eCommerce, and banking platforms. Apica's versatility supports both on-premises and cloud environments, ensuring accurate insights into service availability and network performance.

Apica

The unified auditing functionality in Microsoft 365 provides organizations with visibility into many types of audited activities across many different services in Microsoft 365. Advanced Audit helps organizations to conduct forensic and compliance investigations by increasing audit log retention required to conduct an investigation, providing access to crucial events that help determine scope of compromise, and faster access to Office 365 Management Activity API.

Microsoft

Sample Customers

HBO, JPMC, Morgan Stanley, Xander, EA Sports, Volvo

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Apica vs. Microsoft Purview Audit

March 2026

Free Report: Apica vs. Microsoft Purview Audit

Find out what your peers are saying about Apica vs. Microsoft Purview Audit and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Apica vs. Microsoft Purview Audit report.

See our list of best Log Management vendors.

We monitor all Log Management 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.