Apica vs Stackify comparison

Apica and Stackify are both solutions in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category. Apica is ranked #17 with an average rating of 7.7, while Stackify is ranked #61. Apica holds a 0.3% mindshare in APM, compared to Stackify’s 0.2% mindshare. Additionally, 81% of Apica users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 71% of Stackify users who would recommend it.

Apica

Read 11 Apica reviews

1,060 Views
668 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

Stackify

Read 6 Stackify reviews

822 Views
477 Comparison Views

71% willing to recommend

Apica

Stackify

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

Stackify and Apica are both prominent tools in the field of application performance management and monitoring. Based on user reviews, Apica has an edge over Stackify in terms of comprehensive feature offerings and overall user satisfaction.

Features: Stackify is appreciated for its easy-to-use API integration, real-time log management capabilities, and actionable insights from its error tracking system. Apica is praised for its extensive monitoring capabilities, including synthetic monitoring, real user monitoring, and being a more feature-rich option.

Room for Improvement: Stackify users suggest improvements in the stability of the system, better customization options for alerts, and addressing the steep learning curve for advanced features. Apica users point out the need for a more intuitive learning experience, quicker response times for support inquiries, and improvements in customer service speed.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Stackify is recognized for its straightforward deployment process and efficient customer service. Apica, though powerful, faces criticism for its complex deployment procedures and slower response from customer support compared to Stackify.

Pricing and ROI: Stackify is favored for its affordable pricing models and high return on investment, suitable for startups and mid-sized businesses. Apica, despite its higher cost, delivers substantial ROI due to its extensive feature set and effectiveness in large-scale environments.

To learn more, read our detailed Apica vs. Stackify Report (Updated: August 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Apica vs. Stackify

August 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 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 Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

17th

Ranking in Log Management

18th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

IT Operations Analytics (5th), Observability Pipeline Software (2nd)

Stackify

Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

61st

Ranking in Log Management

61st

Average Rating

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

IT Infrastructure Monitoring (59th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Apica is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Stackify is 0.2%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

Featured Reviews

Punith H K

Senior Systems Engineer at Infosys

Enables users to create scripts easily and provides excellent real-time monitoring features

It is easy to create scripts. We don't have to write any script. Ready-made options are available. We can select, drag, and drop the options, and the script is ready. The solution’s real-time monitoring features have had a huge impact on our service delivery. If we have an application and the script for it, we keep monitoring it. When the script goes red, it indicates that something is not working. So, we check and analyze the applications. We keep track of applications and monitor whether they are live or not. The tool is also useful for monitoring cloud services.

Read full review

Kalyan Somisetty

Senior Developer at PRESIS KONSULT

Simple, easy to configure, and offers trial versions

In the next version, which I want to try, it'll show the comparison of the old responses of the APS. For example, how much time the old response and the new response with the changes. Right now, I cannot differentiate. The graphical interface should be able to capture nicely how much time it has taken and it should be very clear. Sometimes it confuses us. For example, what is this APA for? What were the average responses and how many requests have happened? It needs to give a clear picture. They should enable request and response capturing in the Stackify user interface to show what the request for the APA is. Then, it'll be very good. It should be able to capture the payload. For example, what is the request and what is the response? If it has a nice way of capturing everything then it would be easy. There is no need of using ELK again for logging. As of now, people will use Stackify or maybe Grafana for seeing the stats of the application or responses, however, it doesn't have the capabilities to show everything. People will go for any exception handling or checking the request and response in the ELK. If Stackify can do this future, then it'll be an easier single tool. It is anyway intercepting the logs, application logs. I don't think it's a big matter to capture extra data with the requested response. That requested response capturing also should be configurable since some people want the question response to be captured and for the people that don't want it, we can use that feature. It can be enabled as desired. Many people are using different monitoring tools like ELK, LogStash, and Splunk - many other tools. However, if you can make this kind of performance tool cover everything, then they will not shift to other solutions. It should be easily scalable and configurable in different instances. For example, if the same application is scaled up to differently, it should be easily integrable into Kubernetes pipelines. They should offer plugins to make it more easily integratable. For development enrollment, it should be free to use.

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."

"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."

"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."

"APICa allows me to record APIs easily and enhances scripts through options like auto-correlation, enabling me to access dynamic fields."

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

"You can tell from the operational space of people who are using and consuming this data that they are more integrated. It is not dependent on one team anymore. It saves a lot of time by capturing and pinpointing the exact problem that is happening quickly. We have moved from getting escalations manually to getting escalations synthetically."

"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 integrate with other tools with a separate execution environment. The tool is also easy to use."

"I like the transcript download feature. And with UI scripting, it's helpful that Apica handles a lot of the backend work automatically. I don't have to tag everything manually, though I can tag elements later if needed. It's really good at recording the steps."

More Apica pros

"The filter feature on Stackify is one of the features I found valuable. It's awesome. When I want to get the application logs, the solution gives me many filters. For example, if I want to get logs from my test environment, the option is there for me to select the environment from Stackify, and you can also select the particular application, and you'll see the information you need there. The filter feature alone and the fact that Stackify offers a lot of different filters is what I like the most about the solution because I've used other tools with the filter feature, but the filtering was very difficult, versus Stackify that has good filtering. On Stackify, you can filter the information by the last one hour, or the last four hours, and you can also select the date range and specify the timestamp, then the solution will give you the information based on the date range you specified. Another feature I found valuable on Stackify is its rating feature because it tells you how your application is faring. For example, a rating of A means excellent, while a rating of F means very bad, or that your application is not doing well at all. The ratings are from A to F. I also like that Stackify helps you in terms of load management because the solution gives you information on overutilized resources. These are the most valuable features of the solution."

"The deployment is very fast."

"The solution is stable and reliable."

"The performance dashboard and the accurate level of details are beneficial."

Cons

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

"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."

"The tool does not provide automatic correlation features."

"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."

"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."

"The reporting part that we use for our executives needs a bit more customization capabilities. Right now, you can use only the three main templates for reporting. We would like to be able to customize them."

"Apica is costly, and there's no way to test mobile applications through Apica."

More Apica cons

"It should be easily scalable and configurable in different instances."

"I would like to be able to see metrics about individual running containers on the host machines."

"The search feature could be improved."

"I've not used Stackify for a while, and I'm currently using a solution now that's not as good as Stackify. Among the solutions I've been using so far, Stackify has been one of the best for me, but there's always room for improvement. For example, I don't know if it's just me, but when I try to get the log from Stackify, sometimes it doesn't appear in real-time. It takes a few minutes before the logs appear. When I redeploy my solution and the application starts, I don't see the logs immediately, and it would take two to three minutes before I see the logs. I don't know if other customers have a similar experience. It's the wait time for the logs to appear that's a concern for me, could be improved, and is what the Stackify team should be looking into. In terms of any additional feature that I'd like added to the solution, I'm not sure if Stackify has a way to export logs out. I've been trying to do it. On the solution, you can click on a spiral-like icon and it shows you the entire error, and I'd prefer an export button that would let me download the error and save that into a text file, for example, so it'll be available on my local machine for me to reference it, especially because the log keeps going and as you're using the solution, the system keeps pushing messages on to Stackify, so if I'm looking at a particular error at 12:05 PM, for example, by the time I go back to my system and would like to revisit the error at 12:25 PM, on Stackify, the logs would have gone past that level and I won't see it again which makes it difficult. When you now go back to that timestamp, you don't tend to see it immediately, but if the solution had an export feature for me to save that particular error information on my local machine for reference at a later time, I won't have to go back to Stackify. I just go to that log, specifically to that particular export that I've received on my local machine. I can get it and review it, and it would be easier that way versus me going back to Stackify to find that particular error and request that particular information."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 pricing and licensing are very reasonable. At the end of the day, you are using their technology/software and getting X amount of checks for a very decent value. As for discounts, they try to meet your budgets as much as they can. For example, if you need 100 checks and you have X amount of budget for it, then they will try and get down to that price. Costing-wise, it is a reasonably cost product. They will always try and come down to your price if you need them to come down to it by knocking off certain areas."

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

"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 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 product is less expensive compared to LoadRunner."

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

"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

"The price is variable. It depends on how much data we have received in that particular month. Usually, it goes up to $2,000, or, at times, $3,000 USD per month."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Media Company

11%

Comms Service Provider

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

Media Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Dynatrace vs Apica

Compared 27% of the time

Cribl vs Apica

Compared 19% of the time

AlertSite vs Apica

Compared 12% of the time

Datadog vs Apica

Compared 12% of the time

Splunk Enterprise Security vs Apica

Compared 11% of the time

More Apica Competitors

New Relic vs Stackify

Compared 47% of the time

Dynatrace vs Stackify

Compared 32% of the time

Splunk Enterprise Security vs Stackify

Compared 21% of the time

More Stackify Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Apica

August 2025

Download Apica product report

Buyer's Guide

Stackify

July 2025

Download Stackify 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

Stackify is an application performance management (APM) solution that combines application performance monitoring with logs, errors, and reporting. It is a SaaS solution that is developer-focused. Users can quickly scan, identify, and repair issues with applications. Stackify APM offers valuable tools, such as Prefix and Retrace, which help to make it a comprehensive and valuable APM solution. Stackify is now part of the Netreo family of IT Infrastructure Management (ITIM), which is considered one of the fastest-growing IT organizations in the marketplace today.

Stackify Prefix

Stackify Prefix helps developers write better code, faster. The tool examines, tests, and approves code as it is being written. Almost every new application is code-perfect, negating the need for exhausting troubleshooting and frustrating time-consuming code review.

Prefix is able to discover poor-performing SQL queries, ORM queries, potential bottlenecks, and concealed exceptions prior to moving the application into production.

Prefix offers Summary Dashboards, intuitive suggestions, integrated logs, and distributed tracing. Distributed tracing expands visibility to cloud-native applications, microservices, and containers and can also provide additional transparency to cache services, web services, third-party services, and more. Users are able to easily move from logs to traces and back.

This valuable tool ensures developers are able to consistently release the best code possible in the least amount of time, while improving performance, productivity, and profitability.

Prefix is a very robust and easy-to-use tool. It can be used seamlessly with Linux, macOS, and Windows. Prefix integrates well with numerous languages, such as Java, Python, Ruby, PHP, Node.js, .Net, and .Net Core.

Stackify Retrace

Stackify Retrace is a user-friendly, trusted APM solution used in more than fifty countries worldwide. Users know that Retrace is able to ensure they can complete quicker, more efficient application development and consistently enhance overall application performance by suggesting important intuitive suggestions users need.

This solution is beneficial to both developers (Dev) and operations (Ops) personnel to learn to improve code and immediately finetune issues by:

Establishing effortless collaboration between Dev and Ops personnel via an easy-to-use GUI dashboard.
Delivering complete transparency of all stages of the application development process, from pre-development to production.
Utilizing performance protocols, such as error tracking, application logs, and code profiling, in real time in order to thoroughly understand how long a code will take to complete various tasks.
Improving overall efficiency and productivity by immediately discovering and repairing application issues.

Retrace Real User Monitoring (RUM) uses both front-end and back-end monitoring to give users a complete picture of what is going on with the applications. This intuitive dashboard displays performance with a complete breakdown of resource usage and integrates the server-side and client traces into one engaging, user-friendly, extensive view.

Retrace is an out-of-the-box solution that works seamlessly with Java stacks, PHP, Node.js, Ruby, Python, .Net, and .Net Core. It is also compatible with many of today’s popular frameworks, such as AWS, Azure, Elasticsearch, MongoDB, MySQL, Oracle, PostgreSQL, Redis, and SQL Server. Additionally, Retrace will work effectively with many cloud providers, containers, and languages, and offers excellent and easy integration with today's favorite tools such as Jira, Slack, Jenkins, and more.

Stackify

Sample Customers

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

MyRacePass, ClearSale, Newitts, Carbonite, Boston Software, Children's International, Starkwood Media Group, Fewzion

Buyer's Guide

Apica vs. Stackify

August 2025

Free Report: Apica vs. Stackify

Find out what your peers are saying about Apica vs. Stackify and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Apica vs. Stackify report.

See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Log Management vendors.

We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.