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

HPE Eucalyptus [EOL] vs VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

HPE Eucalyptus [EOL]
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (21st), Cloud Cost Management (5th)
 

Featured Reviews

HW
Good interface, and an easy initial setup with good community support on the free version
The customization should be improved. We should be able to diversify the machine for AWS. When we get involved with that right now, it becomes very bad. Some areas of configuration didn't work for us. The solution should offer more speed and should be able to stabilize the database environment. We've tried to do this, but it hasn't been solid. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If we want to do an interceptor, what we need is a really high level of TT programming or a specific configuration to be able to scale it out. It works to some extent, but it's not strong. When it does not implement in our center we have to go and manually fix it. The solution should be able to better scale the number of users, especially when you're using the cloud. The solution should extend better into the Microsoft community and companies should be able to run it on Azure Cloud.
Steve Staten - PeerSpot reviewer
The solution has excellent scalability, great dashboards, and is stable
I use the solution daily, multiple hours a day to identify possible savings by analyzing the various displays as well as the policies for possible cost savings for our customers CloudHelth has helped our organization with trying to right-size virtual machines based on current utilization and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the interface on the console."
"The solution is useful for cloud transparency and visibility in reports and dashboards that I have generated, especially the pre-populated dashboards."
"The pricing is rather competitive right now."
"The most valuable thing I have found is the cost saving recommendations"
"We use dashboards quite heavily, but one of the features that have really stood out is some of the policies we've created to alert us of particular situations."
"The product is easy to use in terms of monitoring all the environments. It works for multiple clouds."
"We are able to create an internal price of the product that we can then sell to clients. We get the cost plan at a good discount and then resell it with a mark up to our enterprise-level clients. This flexibility in pricing is one of the solution's best features."
"The solution is good for cloud cost management."
"It's stable. For report presentation, it's been fast."
 

Cons

"The customization should be improved."
"The performance and accuracy of Cloud Health need to be improved."
"They should provide information or tools to tune the cloud resources according to the environment size."
"The Perspectives feature could be better."
"The solution doesn't offer the best functionality, unfortunately. Some features just simply aren't on offer. The solution needs to offer more product milestones."
"It would be helpful to have a mobile version or a tablet version, especially for people who are outside of the office."
"CloudHealth needs to start building out Turbonomics-types of features that help the customers who are using CloudHealth really understand everything down to the server level, the virtual machine level."
"The export features regarding CSV files and specifically around identifying savings plans have room for improvement, as well as the drill-down features for reservation utilization."
"I would like to see better integration from CloudHealth to create easier setup and implementation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing is competitive and while other products are good they are considerably more expensive."
"I give the cost of the solution an eight out of ten."
"The licensing fees depend on how big the company is. If you are a larger company then you have a better contract with a better price. The price is different for a small company."
"There could be flexibility in pricing for the product."
"CloudHealth has a subscription-based model."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Educational Organization
11%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about CloudHealth?
The product is easy to use in terms of monitoring all the environments. It works for multiple clouds.
What needs improvement with CloudHealth?
There could be flexibility in pricing for the product. They should provide information or tools to tune the cloud resources according to the environment size. It will help us get the right cost. Ad...
What advice do you have for others considering CloudHealth?
I rate VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth an eight out of ten.
 

Also Known As

Eucalyptus, HP Eucalyptus
Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, CloudHealth
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Mosaik Solutions, Nava Solutions
Pinterest, Dow Jones, RhythmOne, Ziff Davis, Acquia, Mentor Graphics, Lookout, Veracode, SwiftKey, Amtrak, Shi, Imgur, SumoLogic, NewsUK, Cloudera, Canvas
Find out what your peers are saying about Nutanix, VMware, IBM and others in Cloud Management. Updated: June 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.