Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Avada Software Infrared360 vs ScienceLogic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 6, 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

Avada Software Infrared360
Ranking in Server Monitoring
42nd
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (76th), Business Activity Monitoring (8th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (13th)
ScienceLogic
Ranking in Server Monitoring
10th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (6th), Unified Communications Monitoring (1st), Network Monitoring Software (16th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (14th), IT Operations Analytics (4th), Cloud Monitoring Software (12th), AIOps (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Server Monitoring category, the mindshare of Avada Software Infrared360 is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScienceLogic is 2.2%, down from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Monitoring Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ScienceLogic2.2%
Avada Software Infrared3600.6%
Other97.2%
Server Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

WK
ICT Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems
* We now have the possibility of getting a central perspective on all tenants. * We have defined access roles for developers. Therefore, they can 'read in' their queues on the development and testing stages. With special roles, they may also write. This improves our development and testing cycle. * For operative systems, we have restricted the access. Still, selected people can react if something is happening in the various BOQs.
Michael Wenn - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO / Co-Founder at Aiops ltd
Offers comprehensive monitoring and tool consolidation but integration complexity needs improvement
There is room for improvement in the speed of setting up the service and integrating PowerPacks. Although these prebuilt features are great, there is considerable complexity in bringing them together to create a unified dashboard. Even with many good integrations and deep visibility, the implementation takes time, especially when it doesn't involve these integrations. While some other companies have easier APIs, using this solution demands significant expertise. It's challenging for new customers to implement independently. The implementation speed of non-PowerPack or non-out-of-the-box integrations should be improved. Additionally, the AI automation feature is not yet very rich due to resource constraints supporting a wide platform.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."
"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"The solution excels in three areas: application monitoring, server monitoring, and network performance monitoring."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing. There is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"The integration of ScienceLogic with our existing IT ecosystems has significantly benefited our organization, as all alerts now directly go to IBM Netcool and then to the ITSM tool, ServiceNow."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"The power flow is great."
"ScienceLogic's custom enablement, which I can achieve as a Python developer, is unique."
 

Cons

"The UI can be cumbersome - but we are still using the Viper interface and we have not had the time to check out the Alloy interface which is supposed to be much improved."
"One area where they could improve is with their documentation. Some sections are not up to date with new release information and providing additional samples in some areas would be very helpful."
"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"We are still working with the FTE/MFT subscription monitoring and reporting functionality. That is an area in which we would like to see further development taking place."
"Some of the graphics in the interface could be improved. It's pretty basic. Some interfaces are not up to what you're used to seeing on other, more Windows-like tools."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"They should add CLI command modes​ and scripts for high performance."
"Addressing duplicate IPs: There is the ability to edit the DB and fix this, but adding some logic to understand them would be a plus."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"If I were a small to medium business, I probably wouldn't choose this provider. It is a heavily configurable, heavyweight, and scalable IT solution for IT infrastructure monitoring."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Start small, then increase licensing later as per your demand."
"Our internal budget calculation model incorporates the pricing per endpoint for any new projects. However, as our footprint for distributed queue managers shrinks as part of our shared middleware hub deployment, the initial licensing and support costs have been reduced over the last five years."
"Because the licensing is at the QMGR level, you need to have at least a small cushion of licenses for occasional enterprise needs."
"Avada Software's licensing metric is very good because the license fees are based on the number of connections (which have not increased for us very much over the years) rather than the CPU processing power (which increases significantly whenever our hardware is upgraded) or the number of users (which has increased for us a lot since our original purchase)."
"It comes with the OS built in, so no need to purchase an OS license or DB license."
"Decide what you want to monitor and only monitor those items. Absorb other elements as you grow."
"Its price could be lower, but for what you pay, you got a lot of value from its features and functionalities. Customers always want a discount or a cheaper solution."
"The license of ScienceLogic is based on how many endpoints are used. The number of monitoring points you want to have."
"My company has an enterprise-level contract with ScienceLogic, so it is available to my organization at a good price."
"Plan for adding more to it. Once you see EM7 in action, you will want to keep adding systems to monitor."
"The pricing model for ScienceLogic could improve."
"Pricing between the two is quiet large therefore you can save some money if you don't require to collect all info on each device."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
31%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Printing Company
10%
Performing Arts
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about ScienceLogic?
The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ScienceLogic?
ScienceLogic is not that expensive and is cost-effective overall.
What needs improvement with ScienceLogic?
I am interested in improving the flexibility of ScienceLogic's user interface, configuration, and customization. I am particularly keen on learning about issues raised by the ScienceLogic support t...
 

Also Known As

Infrared360
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

USBank, Southwest Airlines, Visiting Nurse Services of New York, Aon Hewitt, Parker Hannifin,  Cantonal Bank of Zurich (ZKB), Hagemeyer NA, and many others
Kellogg Company, Booz Allen, Cisco, Red Bull, Fidelus, Telstra, Comcast, CSC, Peak 10, HughesNet, Hosting, Datapipe, US Army, Equinix, Rite Aid, Carbonite, Sybase, Carpathia, AT&T, ePlus, Dimension Data, Virtustream, Boeing, Honeywell
Find out what your peers are saying about Avada Software Infrared360 vs. ScienceLogic and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.