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

Goliath Performance Monitor vs Splunk Observability Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Goliath Performance Monitor
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
61st
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Splunk Observability Cloud
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (8th), Network Monitoring Software (6th), Cloud Monitoring Software (6th), Container Management (6th), Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Goliath Performance Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Splunk Observability Cloud is 2.0%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Splunk Observability Cloud2.0%
Goliath Performance Monitor0.5%
Other97.5%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

networke29316 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 201-500 employees
Monitors well with Citrix, stable, and the support is very responsive
It looks like it is easy to scale, but I don't know how far it can go out. We are only a 300, or 400 person company. We are not terribly large. It looks like it should be able to scale up until 10,000 at least. There are two users in the company who use this solution, I use it, and the helpdesk.
Dhananjay Dileep - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Unified monitoring has improved end-to-end visibility and reduced detection time across apps
When we have too many detectors in place for one particular app, such as when I have created 50+ detectors through my account, the entire page becomes a bit loaded when creating the 51st detector, feeling heavy and taking time to load. Additionally, it throws random errors; for example, when we try to save one detector, it might throw some random error which is not even related, with something else being wrong, not that particular error, but the underlying root cause might be different. Sometimes the error is just "some problem occurred," and we are not able to point out what the real cause is. This mainly happens when we have too many detectors or too many alerts in place rather than a standard number. One more thing is in the alert rules; if we have a main general alert, and instead of creating a new detector, we are adding a new rule under one detector, when the number of rules also increases, such as when we have 10 or 15 rules under one generic detector, that again creates the same kind of problem, taking some time to save that particular newly added rule, and it might not save at times, just keeps on spinning. Those are the two drawbacks which I spotted recently; other than that, everything looks perfect.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Offers a diversity of features."
"I like that it not only has the ability to monitor but that it can do a lot of specific Citrix monitoring."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to customize dashboards based on my queries or any other customization I may need."
"With the metrics collection, I can proactively find incidents and work on the major issues when they happen and predict these issues."
"Overall, I would recommend Splunk to anyone seeking a monitoring solution, thanks to its extensive capabilities and features."
"Initially, before Splunk, we had a long time to resolve issues. Now, with Splunk Observability Cloud, we will be able to solve them quickly and know exactly where the issue is."
"The tool's stability is great."
"The maintenance of Splunk Observability Cloud is very easy; it's manageable."
"It supports proactive management, enhances security, and improves operational efficiency."
"Splunk has drawn our attention to how the network is running. If there are alarms on things that are not functioning, it gives us early warning on problems that could arise."
 

Cons

"Issues with generating reports; consistency is not there."
"I would love to be able to tell what ISP the user is coming from."
"The solution's stability is an area that has room for improvement. It needs to provide constant stability to its users."
"To improve Splunk Observability Cloud, we need more applications to be included in the observability so that more applications can have agents to monitor them and bring that information to the cloud."
"It's a bit difficult to use. It takes some time to get into it and to get it to do what you would like it to do. It is not straightforward to use it."
"We currently lack log analysis capabilities in Splunk APM."
"The pricing would be one area for improvement."
"The end-to-end visibility is lacking because Splunk cannot directly monitor network devices."
"Splunk would be better if some tools were integrated to be able to take action on security or network concerns."
"Splunk Observability Cloud could be improved by having more integration with Splunk Cloud because at the moment they're two separate products. They're making great moves on what they call unified access; tighter integration is always a good thing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price seems reasonable."
"I am not in that circle, but we are currently licensing based on our queries. That is working out for us. Previously, it was by volume of data, and now, we can store as much data as we want."
"Splunk APM is a very cost-efficient solution."
"Splunk Observability Cloud is expensive."
"It appears to be expensive compared to competitors."
"Splunk's infrastructure monitoring costs can be high because our billing is based on data volume measured in terabytes, rather than the number of devices being monitored."
"Splunk offers a 14-day free trial and after that, we have to pay but the cost is reasonable."
"The solution's pricing is costly."
"It is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
17%
Healthcare Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Performing Arts
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Retailer
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise47
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about SignalFx?
The most valuable feature is dashboard creation.
What needs improvement with SignalFx?
Regarding dashboard customization, while Splunk has many dashboard building options, customers sometimes need to create specific dashboards, particularly for applicative metrics such as Java and pr...
What is your primary use case for SignalFx?
The solution involves observability in general, such as Application Performance Monitoring, and generally addresses digital applications, web applications, sites, and mobile applications. I worked ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring, Splunk Real User Monitoring (RUM), Splunk Synthetic Monitoring
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Facebook, Xerox, UHS, ADP, Wyndham Worldwide
Sunrun, Yelp, Onshape, Tapjoy, Symphony Commerce, Chairish, Clever, Grovo, Bazaar Voice, Zenefits, Avalara
Find out what your peers are saying about Goliath Performance Monitor vs. Splunk Observability Cloud and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.