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

InfluxDB vs Kaseya Traverse comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 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

InfluxDB
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Non-Relational Databases (1st), Open Source Databases (7th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (16th), NoSQL Databases (6th)
Kaseya Traverse
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
78th
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (49th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of InfluxDB is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaseya Traverse is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
InfluxDB0.3%
Kaseya Traverse0.5%
Other99.2%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Mugeesh Husain - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead, Software at Energybox
Time series data has been managed efficiently for IoT sensors but reporting still needs improvement
How InfluxDB can be improved is relevant since for Energy Box, we face certain issues. We have customers worldwide, including the United States, United Kingdom, and Europe, but when we expanded to China two years ago, they indicated that they do not support the cloud version there. Our application is built on the cloud, which required us to create a separate application for Azure China, which was painful for us. The second issue involves frequent version changes. For example, we started with version one, transitioned to version two, and I heard they are considering InfluxDB version three, reverting to earlier practices. InfluxDB should improve without completely changing its approach. Now we have to redo our work for InfluxDB version three. Regarding needed improvements, the documentation is sufficient, but pricing presents a challenge. InfluxDB has standard pricing, which is acceptable for large companies. However, for startups in our position, they should provide special discounts so everyone can utilize it. The pricing should adapt as companies grow, which is a reasonable expectation.
AMMAR HUMAIDY HUSIN - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Consultant at a university with 11-50 employees
Automation increases efficiency, but pricing needs to be more competitive
Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpful for me as a customer. The issue always is the price, as we cannot beat most of our competitors on pricing alone. If a product is just nice to have, not essential like an antivirus, if it's not really competitive with pricing, we cannot sell it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Based on InfluxDB, we have great analytics produced by our SRE team, and with that, we have an alerting and monitoring system in place."
"Overall, InfluxDB delivered excellent performance, stability, and simplicity for telemetry-driven use cases."
"This product has been working well and it is serving our purpose, so I can recommend it to others."
"Because of reduced downtime, we benefit greatly from receiving alerts in advance."
"I recommend going with the cloud version of InfluxDB, as it's very cheap and effective."
"InfluxDB is a database where you can insert data. However, it would be best if you had different components for alerting, data sending, and visualization. You need to install tools to collect data from servers. It must be installed on Windows or Linux servers. During installation, ensure that the configuration file is correct to prevent issues. Once data is collected, it can be sent to InfluxDB. For visualization, you can use open-source tools like Grafana."
"While I would rate InfluxDB a ten on a scale of one to ten, users should be thoughtful about matching the engine to their specific needs."
"InfluxDB has played a key role in enhancing system reliability and supporting our goal of delivering a seamless, high-quality product."
"If I want to automate the management and maintenance of my server automatically, this product is a good use case for that."
"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."
"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."
"We have found the solution to be very flexible to our requirements. We have been able to configure it on-premise effectively when we were using less of the cloud."
"It's a simple and humble tool."
"It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution."
"Most of the features are pretty good and the solution is user friendly."
"The remote support and data collection features are great."
 

Cons

"However, I do wish the documentation and community resources around Flux were more extensive and beginner-friendly."
"In terms of features that I would like to see or have, in the community version, some features are not available. I would like to have clustering and authentication in the community version."
"Sometimes, when we write too much data within a minute, the data count becomes excessive, reaching perhaps 100,000 or 500,000 data points, and InfluxDB gives a timeout exception, which we must handle in our application."
"The error logging capability can be improved because the logs are not very informative."
"InfluxDB cannot be used for high-cardinality data. It's also difficult and time-consuming to write queries, and there are some issues with bulk API."
"If it gets a little bit more into the metric side, then it would really be great, similar to Prometheus."
"InfluxDB can improve by including new metrics on other technologies. They had some changes recently to pool data from endpoints but the functionality is not good enough in the industry."
"The solution doesn't have much of a user interface."
"Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us."
"Improvement is needed in making it cheaper."
"However, the issue lies in the adequacy of the responses to my questions, which are usually not up to par."
"Reporting is a bit difficult."
"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."
"In terms of what could be improved, we are innovating all the time, as well as having a look at different avenues so that the strategy follows the structure. I think the software is still a little bit too new to actually fully asses what it has."
"Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect."
"The support for the solution needs some improvement. In my experience, the response time to answer a query is slow."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"InfluxDB recently increased its price. It is very expensive now."
"InfluxDB is open-source, but there are additional costs for scaling."
"We are using the open-source version of InfluxDB."
"The tool is an open-source product."
"The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive."
"The price depends on whether you are monitoring different applications, especially in bulk, and depends on what you're doing. If you're monitoring one endpoint, it will cost you 150 ZAR."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
University
9%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
Wholesaler/Distributor
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about InfluxDB?
InfluxDB is a database where you can insert data. However, it would be best if you had different components for alerting, data sending, and visualization. You need to install tools to collect data ...
What needs improvement with InfluxDB?
InfluxDB can be improved in several ways. The Flux query language needs to be learned, but if there were something similar to SQL or previous options, it would be much easier for users without impo...
What is your primary use case for InfluxDB?
My main use case for InfluxDB is for server management metrics, Kubernetes monitoring, and application performance monitoring due to the time series data involved. We have InfluxDB integrated with ...
What needs improvement with Kaseya Traverse?
Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpfu...
What is your primary use case for Kaseya Traverse?
If I want to automate the management and maintenance of my server automatically, this product is a good use case for that.
What advice do you have for others considering Kaseya Traverse?
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. As Kaseya sellers, we always promote Kaseya first. If the price is more competitive, then I think it will be better. It's a main pain point for us as a resel...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ebay, AXA, Mozilla, DiDi, LeTV, Siminars, Cognito, ProcessOut, Recommend, CATS, Smarsh, Row 44, Clustree, Bleemeo
UltiSat, Clear Concepts, nVidia, United States Postal Service, Cisco, Redbox, Spark Digital, People's Bank & Trust
Find out what your peers are saying about InfluxDB vs. Kaseya Traverse and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.