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

Azure Monitor vs Portkey comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (10th)
Portkey
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
26th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 1.9%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portkey is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Monitor1.9%
Portkey0.3%
Other97.8%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Andy Rabern - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Telemetry insights have improved how I track user behavior and application performance daily
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it does well. My perspective is more based on an Application Insights agent running on a service or an app service and sending the telemetry via the agent, and also doing the filtering of telemetry at the agent level so you are not having a ton of telemetry. I believe Azure Monitor does pretty much the same thing. I have also used tools such as New Relic, and New Relic is a much more robust tool, but that is a different product and you are going to pay for that. It is a different offering altogether. The subscription that we had at the time allowed for a couple gigabytes of telemetry during the month, and I believe that telemetry only lives for about two months. You have to experiment with it to see how much you want to pay. I was not really involved in the pricing. It was more along the lines of we were running up against our limits in terms of the amount of free telemetry or telemetry that we get with our subscription, and so we either needed to scale back or turn specific telemetry types off or do some more sampling. It is nice that those capabilities are there so that you can reduce the amount of telemetry. I cannot really speak to pricing but I do believe that it is somewhat reasonable for Azure Monitor. New Relic is pretty expensive, I believe.
Shravan Revanna - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at klydo.in
Centralized AI control has standardized our workflows and delivers faster, more reliable features
There are definitely some places where Portkey can be improved. Overall, the experience has been positive, but the first area is analytics and reporting. While the observability feature is excellent, we would like to have richer historical analytics and customizable dashboards. For example, it would be useful to see trends by applications and teams or features over long periods without exporting data to an external BI tool. Another area is governance for large organizations. As AI adoption grows, enterprises need more granular, role-based access control. We would like to see more advanced AI evaluation capability built into the platform itself, including features such as prompt versioning and automated quality scoring and regression testing. Finally, while the platform is supported with multiple providers, we would welcome even more intelligent routing capabilities, such as automatically selecting the best model based on latency, cost, and task complexity using configurable policies. These are not major pain points, but they are enhancements that would make an already strong platform even more valuable for an organization that scales their AI workloads. Documentation and onboarding could be enhanced. Portkey is developer-friendly, but we need more end-to-end references, architecture, and implementation guides for common AI patterns. This would help teams adopt it even faster. I did not give Portkey a perfect score because while it has become a foundational component in our AI stack and solves several operational challenges, I would still like to see deeper analytics, stronger enterprise governance features, and more built-in AI evaluation capabilities, especially for prompt testing, regression analysis, and model benchmarking. I would be comfortable recommending Portkey to any organization that is building multiple AI applications or wants to manage a scalable way to handle LLM providers and produce AI traffic.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the most useful aspects of this solution is the out-of-the-box functionality on all areas, especially on Application Insights, zero instrumentation, and artificial intelligence for event correlation."
"What I like about Azure Monitor is that it performs well."
"The solution has tons of valuable features."
"Log analytics and log queries are the most valuable features of Azure Monitor."
"The detailed logging is great."
"This is a good enough product for anyone wanting something that might not be top of the range but it does the work easily, is simple to configure and is a fair price."
"The feature that I found most valuable in Azure Monitor is its monitoring abilities. With Azure Monitor, you are able to monitor all of your cloud resources across multiple subscriptions in one dashboard and create solution-specific alerts that can trigger an email to the team responsible for that specific solution."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Portkey's visualization is excellent, I particularly appreciate the multiple capabilities they have introduced, especially the MCP gateway, which is outstanding, the caching mechanism is very good, and the logs and traceability features are also excellent."
"Portkey has significantly improved the organization by streamlining the AI processes being followed."
"Portkey is totally stable; it is one of the best software solutions in the market for this purpose."
"Portkey definitely provides a solid alternative solution for the agent and large model hosting platforms, and it is very helpful for us to explore the possibilities across the industry rather than staying with a few mainstream options."
"Overall, Portkey has had a huge business impact in terms of cost savings and operational efficiency."
 

Cons

"The product should integrate well with other tools or clouds in the future, as it is one of the areas where the product currently has certain shortcomings."
"This solution could be improved with more out-of-the-box functionalities and artificial intelligence to complete event correlation."
"In my opinion, they should improve the overall user experience, especially when it comes to indexing and searching collective logs."
"Using Azure Monitor and Azure Arc separately to monitor different environments can be complicated."
"Automation related to gathering metrics from more applications could be improved."
"It might not have all of the capabilities we will need."
"The pricing model could be more flexible."
"I believe Azure Monitor is already a top-notch solution with excellent functionality and there is not much I would suggest for improvement. However, there is one limitation that certain features require payment, even for testing purposes, which can be a challenge."
"End-to-end traceability is not fully fulfilled. They are only fulfilling about 50 to 60 percent of our end-to-end agent traceability requirements, and the remaining functionality needs to be implemented."
"However, one thing I would like to say is that it could have better documentation."
"One major problem I see with Portkey is that when I had not yet started any trial, it started to denote that I had exceeded the prompt limit."
"The main area for improvement is onboarding and trial experience."
"There are definitely some places where Portkey can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My company is okay with the current pricing of the solution."
"The cost of Azure Monitor application performance should be less expensive."
"Customers of Azure Monitor must pay an amount that depends largely on how many services they need to integrate and the storage space required in terms of logs, etc. If they only have a few small services to monitor, the price won't be too high, but on the opposite side of the spectrum, it can certainly get pricey."
"It is a pay-as-you-go model. I find it very cost-effective."
"The solution’s pricing depends on how much logs it collects."
"Regarding pricing, Azure Monitor is free with Azure license, so there are no additional costs for using it."
"The licensing is a monthly fee."
"Azure Monitor is one of the more cost effective solutions on the market."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Non Profit
33%
Computer Software Company
13%
Construction Company
10%
Retailer
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise29
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it...
What is your primary use case for Azure Monitor?
I am a developer who uses Azure Monitor for telemetry of the applications that I work on. Application Insights is one of those tools, and I have also used other non-Azure products before. Currently...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portkey?
Regarding pricing and licensing, the cost was relatively low because Portkey sits in front of our existing AI infrastructure. From a licensing perspective, I appreciate that the pricing model is pr...
What needs improvement with Portkey?
Portkey does not have an agent registry, which is a feature they should implement in a future release. We need to capture metadata of agents, and this capability is currently missing. End-to-end tr...
What is your primary use case for Portkey?
Our client is completely using AWS products. For AI gateways, we are using Portkey, which is the product we have implemented, and we are leveraging all AWS services for internal application develop...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. Portkey and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.