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

Infraon IMS vs LogicMonitor comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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

Infraon IMS
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
82nd
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
56th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
49th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (33rd)
LogicMonitor
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
6th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
8th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
5th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (9th), Container Monitoring (4th), AIOps (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Infraon IMS is 0.8%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.8%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LogicMonitor2.8%
Infraon IMS0.8%
Other96.4%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

it_user1631601 - PeerSpot reviewer
GTM Manager at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Our process efficiency has improved by having all the information in one place, which has reduced manpower
The product is great. We integrated the ticketing tool with the monitoring tool. The agent ID creation is very easy when using this tool. It is so user-friendly. The user interface is good and also the pricing is great. The user interface is good, even a business user or layman can raise a ticket. They provide an all-in-one monitoring tool. If an issue happens, it gets integrated with the email, then proactively that ticket is being raised, which is good. The reporting is good. It is very clear. It is a customized report; however you want it, you can customize it. We use the solution’s role-based dashboards. The head of IT wants to use it so he can see holistically what is happening, e.g., what are the tickets being raised, what is a major issue, and what escalations are happening. There are different dashboards that are customized. For our head of IT, we made a separate dashboard. Then, for the executives, we made a separate dashboard based on time, like hourly or daily. All these reports were customized. While they didn't provide a BI dashboard, they provide a kind of graphical dashboard for whatever the issue is. Once you click on a particular ticket, it drills down to the issue, what it is and when the issue was raised. The drill down is good. It is more like a business intelligence (BI) tool. You can just scroll and zoom in. It goes deep into the issue. Once you click a particular dashboard, it will take you to the next page, then it takes you to the issue. Infraon IMS provides workflow automation for real-world use cases. This makes our work easier. It is just drag and drop (no coding) to build the workflows. For example, a particular ticket is being raised. It gets routed to three important IT executives within our team. From our team, it gets routed to the next level. The learning curve is good. Initially, there were no issues. As soon as the users saw the product, they understood what the product was. There wasn't any kind of training required for this product because it is very straightforward.
Anshuman Thakur - PeerSpot reviewer
Site Reliability Engineer at a comms service provider with 501-1,000 employees
Monitoring has reduced downtime and now enables proactive alerts across cloud workloads
When it comes to the improvement of LogicMonitor, I think there are a few points that can be improved. The first one is alert tuning, which takes time. It requires effort when trying to understand it for the first time. The defaults do not always match our workload patterns, so I have to adjust the thresholds to reduce noise and avoid alert fatigue. While the dashboards are solid, I sometimes wish that the UI was a bit more intuitive when drilling down quickly during an incident. There are many options and finding the exact view where I can identify the exact problem takes a few extra clicks. When an alert comes and I click on a LogicMonitor alert, it takes time to understand what the alert actually is and to go through the data points. The alert page specifically could be better. The alert tuning part can also be made more simple. The first area that could be better is alert clarity and routing. Sometimes alerts do not include enough immediate context, so I still have to spend a few minutes correlating data across views. Adding more actionable details directly in the alert would make the response even faster. LogicMonitor sometimes gives false alerts as well. For example, if an EC2 instance is down, it will not determine whether the EC2 instance has been deliberately turned off or if it is actually not responding. At that time, it will give false alerts. The clearing of alerts is also an issue. Once an issue is fixed, the alert should be cleared, but it takes a little time for that alert to be cleared. Another improvement that would be helpful is simpler customization for complex dashboards. It is powerful, but building highly tailored dashboards, especially across multiple environments, can feel heavy and time-consuming. I would also appreciate a stronger out-of-the-box AWS correlation, such as automatically grouping related issues across EC2, EBS, and ALBs in a way that reads as a single incident story. This would reduce the mental overhead during outages. Grouping incidents together, such as all the EC2 alerts, all the EBS alerts, or all the load balancer alerts would be beneficial. Overall, none of these are blockers, just some improving areas. There could be smarter anomaly detection out of the box that can catch unusual but important behavior without manual tuning of every threshold. Better tagging and dynamic grouping for EC2 instances would also be helpful. Cleaner alert de-duplication so a single underlying issue does not generate multiple redundant alerts would improve the system. More guided root cause workflows would be beneficial, such as providing the most likely causes based on correlated metrics. Faster search navigation across devices, dashboards, and alerts during incidents would also improve the platform.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Their discovery is very quick and they have a CSV file upload mechanism that allows you to onboard five thousand devices a day."
"Our response time is within 30 minutes for any support. This solution provides alerts immediately, so we are within our SLA, giving efficiency to our support."
"If you are looking for the best product with the best price, Infraon is the best product."
"We have definitely seen ROI since we first implemented Infraon, three years ago, as it has given us clarity and helped us with compliance during audits."
"Being an engineering product, the customization is easy for us compared to SolarWinds and ManageEngine."
"It is a stable product; after the initial configuration, you don't have to tweak it much, and all systems of Everest IMS work perfectly."
"Infraon IMS allows us to do several things from a single window, which is important to us."
"The feature that I like the most and the best part is the customization."
"As a service provider, I believe the biggest benefit from LogicMonitor for my clients is that it provides full-stack infrastructure observability."
"LogicMonitor has more features compared to CloudWatch in terms of real-time alerting, log ingestion, alerting, visualization dashboards, and complaint support."
"It has improved our organization with its capacity planning. We have a performance environment that we use to benchmark our applications. We use it to say, "Okay, at a certain level of concurrency, we know where our application will fall over." Therefore, we are using LogicMonitor dashboards to tell us that we're good. Our platform can handle X number of clients concurrently hitting us at a time."
"The most valuable feature is the visualization of the data that it is collecting. I have used many products in the past and they tend to roll up the data. So, if you're looking at data over long periods of time, they start averaging the data, which can skew the figures that you're looking at. With LogicMonitor, they have the raw data there for two years, if you are an enterprise customer. If you are looking at that long duration of data, you're seeing exactly what happened during that time."
"The plugins are easy to integrate, and LogicMonitor provides these add-ons for vendors like VMware. It becomes very easy to integrate them and take the data sources."
"LogicMonitor is good for getting a full view of your topologies. They have LiveMaps, which give you a visual representation of your infrastructure."
"LogicMonitor has actually helped reduce our downtimes, helping us reduce downtime to about 40 to 50% by warning us before servers get heavy on usage or CPU load so we can take action in advance."
"The alerting would be number one in my book. The thresholds for getting alerts for different criteria are pretty well-thought-out. We don't get many false positives or negatives on the alerting side. If we do get an email alert or some similar alert, we know that it is something that has to be looked at."
 

Cons

"I would like to have the option to add a new device or meet with the next release. Right now, it needs to be done from the backend which results in a heavy reliance on R&D."
"Email support is a bit slow. Once you drop an email, it takes time."
"We have enquired if there are any possibilities of monitoring non-IPBS devices."
"The GUI is in need of improvement. It is not drag-and-drop or easy to use."
"I would like to see an integrated view of Infraon IMS and Infraon Desk. It would be very helpful if that were integrated into the solution."
"This solution is available in SaaS. The reason why we have not gone to SaaS is they do not have a country-specific separation of assets."
"The graphical view of the topology does not show us all of the connectivity in our network, which is something that could be improved."
"There might be some features in other products that are currently not there in Everest IMS and can be included. I have not yet compared it with any other product."
"If you only want to use LogicMonitor in the cloud, there's a better tool available."
"LogicMonitor tends to continuously ping the servers and the environment, which can create a lot of false alerts."
"Role-based permissions could be better and updating modules could be smoother."
"One thing I would like to see is parent/child relationships and the ability to build a "suppression parent/child." For example, If I know that a top gateway is offline and I can't talk to it anymore, and anything that's connected below it or to it is also going to be offline, there is no need to alarm on those. In that situation it should create one ticket or one alarm for the parent. I know they're working towards that with their mapping technology, but it's not quite to that level where you can build out alarm logic or a correlation logic like that."
"This is one thing that is a pain and flaw with LogicMonitor."
"One thing Dynatrace had that I enjoyed was real-time support chat available to reach someone and get help in real-time. With LogicMonitor, that is not really an option."
"We only use plain monitoring and do not use cloud monitoring such as Office 365 because it is too expensive."
"LogicMonitor's reporting capabilities definitely could use an improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay for a number of devices on the accounts and since it is on-premises, we pay the maintenance charges for the year."
"The cost model is within our budget. I have less than 180 critical assets, but the moment that I have 1,000 assets, then the license model is totally different. I don't know whether they are capable of handling that kind of a load. They could revisit the licensing model."
"The pricing is reasonable, given the features that they provide."
"I think that the pricing for this solution is reasonable and varies by number of devices."
"Licensing is calculated on a per-user basis."
"If you are looking for the best product with the best price, Infraon is the best product. We evaluated five to six products and finally felt Infraon was better because of the pricing model, especially because it was more flexible."
"The license is annual, and I'm not fully aware of what it costs. We have a through-cycle that we go through, and they've been generous with us going above our limit. They're not strict on it. At the end of the year, they got us to renew. We always add some cushion for what we expect. Also, if you need custom monitoring or design work, you can pay them for consulting services."
"We are on an enterprise license plan, we are paying $7.75 per device a month. That is for a commitment of 350 devices. Anything that is over the 350 is charged at 1.2 times the rate; 1.2 times $7.75 would be the overage charge. We are looking at increasing our commitment to either 450 or 500 devices. It changes our pricing if we go to 450 devices, bringing it from $7.75 down to $7.70. If we go for 500 devices, it brings it from $7.75 down to $7.50. We will probably factor in the volume discount drop from $7.75 to $7.50 in our decision of whether we uplift or not. We also have some cloud monitors, which are about $500 a month."
"The pricing can be a little aggressive. Right now, it's a bit much for smaller organizations to adopt it. But comparatively, it also provides good features."
"The features were very valuable to us because we could consolidate them into one platform and have a good user experience with the platform, our accounts, and the support team. That was the key driver for us. That was what we were looking for. We looked for a comprehensive solution that could provide advanced features all in one platform, and LogicMonitor was the solution that we chose. It definitely has a premium price. However, you are getting what you pay for in a very effective way. That was important in our decision-making.The features were very valuable to us because we could consolidate them into one platform and have a good user experience with the platform, our accounts, and the support team. That was the key driver for us. That was what we were looking for. We looked for a comprehensive solution that could provide advanced features all in one platform, and LogicMonitor was the solution that we chose. It definitely has a premium price. However, you are getting what you pay for in a very effective way. That was important in our decision-making."
"I know we are saving at least several hundred thousand dollars in that we're not buying Cisco Prime."
"It can handle scaling. It is like any other cloud service. There is a cost associated with scaling, so we currently don't monitor all of our environments. We monitor just the customer-facing production environments. It would be nice if we could monitor our dominant environments, but we will have to pay a lot more due to the scaling issue. So, there's a balance there between what we would like and what we are willing to pay for."
"We have definitely seen ROI with LogicMonitor. We used to provide 24/7 IT support for our users. We have since been able to change to operating just within normal business hours for IT support, and LogicMonitor was a large part of being able to accomplish that."
"As a managed services provider, the licensing model that LogicMonitor provides us is excellent. We are able to scale up and scale down as needed. The pricing is reasonable for the amount of features and support that they provide."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise31
 

Questions from the Community

What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
It actually depends on the exact purpose or requirements. Some tools are better for only network devices while others are better from a cloud monitoring or APM monitoring perspective. You can check...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogicMonitor?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the licensing model has changed and is very confusing as it currently stands and overly complicated.
What needs improvement with LogicMonitor?
I do see negatives and areas for improvement in LogicMonitor. Obviously, there is always space for improvement. First of all, I believe the commercial aspects require improvement. At the moment, if...
What is your primary use case for LogicMonitor?
LogicMonitor is primarily used for observability and data collection.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Everest IMS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Airtel, BSNL, BlackBox Corporation, ACT, Geojit, Canara Bank, Federal Bank, Corporation Bank, Birla Corporation, CESC Limited, Mphasis, GAIL, Udaan, Cowrks, SEBI, PowerGrid, ION, Summit Communications, National Information Technology Center (Nepal), Bhutan National Bank, Servion T, Greenlam, Translab Technologies, CMSIT Services, Nelco, HPCL, Navitas Life Sciences etc. 
Kayak, Zendesk, Ted Baker, Trulia, Sophos, iVision, TekLinks, Siemens
Find out what your peers are saying about Infraon IMS vs. LogicMonitor and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.