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

Avantra vs ITRS Geneos comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 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

Avantra
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
53rd
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
55th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
SAP Service Providers (13th), Server Monitoring (29th)
ITRS Geneos
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
48th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
51st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (73rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Avantra is 1.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ITRS Geneos is 1.0%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ITRS Geneos1.0%
Avantra1.4%
Other97.6%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Mani Velayudhan - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager, SAP Basis at The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company
Can be fine-tuned as required, provides real-time data but lacks sufficient machine learning capability
In terms of machine learning, there are a few areas that can be improved including short terms in the SAP system. Currently, it requires a team member to manually read the short term and then assign it to a team rather than having it assigned automatically. A downside of Avantra is that it comes with predefined values. Another issue is that identical recurring problems create duplicate tickets rather than showing them as repeats. They also need to do some kernel updates which I believe they're working on but I haven't seen it yet; I'm hoping the solution will be completely automated. I would like to see more on the machine-learning front and to have some third-party tools.
Sanket - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Manager at a marketing services firm with 501-1,000 employees
With the help of the solution, we can predict and prevent failures
Currently, the most valuable thing for an individual is a mobile device. Since that is where people are currently tracking everything, we have multiple applications or apps that are for various products. I would like ITRS Geneos to develop an app, where instead of going to specific login terminals or logging into laptops or desktops to check alerts, we can have visibility in the app itself. Using the ITRS Geneos app, we could see the error message during our travels or wherever we are. I would like to see the capacity of messages for forecasting increased. Since the NSE is the number one derivative stock exchange in the work for three consecutive years, the number of messages is important. We use the capacity planner in ITRS to forecast our data needs for the next two months. The planner is important because the volume of data we produce is becoming more and more volatile compared to when we first started using ITRS Geneos in 2014.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Deployment was amazingly short and simple; I do not think I have seen any SAP-related product installs ready to work so fast, and out-of-box it included most of the functions and settings that we needed."
"It's just very user-friendly, and it's very easy to monitor the servers using Avantra."
"I definitely recommend this solution, it provides good value for money."
"The most valuable feature of Avantra is automation. The reduction of manual work and having them automated is one of the top reasons why I would use it."
"It's very easy to manage and use."
"It prevented two major failures in our SAP production systems."
"You can customize alerts based on need."
"Customer Service: Very good. Technical Support: Very good."
"Geneos enables customized aggregate views and alerts for both related and disparate components, and this flexibility and insight facilitates proactive and prompt causation analysis so you can easily see everything at once and know why there is an issue within seconds rather than spend precious time trying to find out."
"The tool is highly customizable and can be tailored to your requirements."
"It's catching things that are going wrong before they become catastrophic, in most cases."
"We use Geneos to monitor our own development and production environments, and due to its automation capabilities we are able to automatically restart failed processes and alert our developers to issues in our applications and infrastructure without traditional eyes on glass monitoring."
"We have been able to monitor the repeated critical alerts and work on producing a more stable environment for our customers."
"ITRS is significantly better than PRTG and saves us a lot of time in development."
"Switching over to using a Geneos dashboard, we completely eliminated all manual effort and it was a huge time saver."
 

Cons

"A downside of Avantra is that it comes with predefined values."
"We are currently exploring automation options for various areas, and Avantra should consider implementing automation for change request management, an area they have not yet ventured into. While Avantra is currently excelling in monitoring and system refreshes, there is scope for improvement in automating change request management. In addition to primarily focusing on SAP, Avantra currently performs kernel patches which are core SAP patches. However, exploring more into OS patching could be another potential area for Avantra to expand its automation capabilities."
"The dashboard needs to improve; it's not so clear right now and we need it to be more usable so we can have all of our reports in one easy-to-access place."
"The dashboard needs to improve."
"The machine-learning is lacking and should be improved."
"I think they can improve their UI, while very intuitive, I would like to see graphic updates."
"The Geneos configuration has greatly improved since the nascent version 1.0 days, but still requires specialist knowledge and convoluted config debugging when something’s not monitoring as expected."
"I would also like to see suggested guidelines to accomplish a monitoring task. The issue is that ITRS is so flexible that there is more than one way to complete a task, each with benefits and disadvantages."
"Data visualization – real time and historical – is a weakness."
"Its web monitoring capability is very hard to use especially if there is authentication involved."
"I had issues scaling it and ended up having to distribute the load over seven gateways."
"The dashboard feature is full of bugs. Grouping items results in a distorted dashboard."
"Data visualization – real time and historical – is a weakness."
"The main feature that needs work is the Dashboard designer. Currently we have to export metrics data in real-time into some other visualization tools in order to get better picture and have a bit more functional dashboard."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Based on feedback from colleagues and friends working in the financial sector, Geneos is relatively costly. Many companies have been switching from Geneos to Dynatrace, Sysdig, or other monitoring tools in the past two years because of the price."
"It is expensive. They have to look at the model around when we move to cloud and how that's going to work. The licensing cost does pay off because of the improvements in support to our business."
"Pricing is the touchy subject, even here. Upper management always wants us to find a cheaper solution. But we have so much integrated with ITRS... It's expensive, but it does its job very well. And you set it and go."
"The product is priced quite high. There are pricing options for customers based on the size of the environment and plug-ins used by the monitoring system."
"Its price is reasonable. It isn't too expensive, and it isn't too cheap, but it also depends on a company's volume and negotiation."
"When I first came in, their pricing was very high. ITRS had a high expectation of what their price should be based on perceived value. I think they have been realizing, more recently, that there are other competitors, so their pricing is a lot better. Licensing for on-premise is okay, however I feel there is quite some work to be done for cloud and containers. We're still working with them to try and work out what that pricing should look like."
"You will get the best price if you get a single global deal."
"The market tools are on par with this solution, but if the solution included more features, then it would be well within the range for the cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
63%
Computer Software Company
5%
Construction Company
4%
Outsourcing Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise39
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Geneos
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Migros, Strauss, Migros, LAM research, Deloitte, Deloitte, Kiewit
ITRS Geneos is used by over 170 financial institutions, including JPMorgan, HSBC, RBS, Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs. Clients range from investment banks to exchanges and brokers.
Find out what your peers are saying about Avantra vs. ITRS Geneos and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.