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

Kaseya Traverse vs New Relic 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

Kaseya Traverse
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
56th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
32nd
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
New Relic
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
10th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
159
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (3rd), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (8th), IT Operations Analytics (3rd), Mobile APM (3rd), AIOps (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Kaseya Traverse is 0.3%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of New Relic is 1.9%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

AMMAR HUMAIDY HUSIN - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Rahul -Jain - PeerSpot reviewer
Good for application Performance Monitoring but not stable
There are two types of teams we have in every organization. One is for DevOps, and the second one is for performance testing. Those who are using these tools, like AppDynamics, Dynatrace, or whatever tool we have on the APM side. These tools are used by two teams: one is the performance team, and another one is the DevOps team. So, the setup and the alert system belong to the DevOps team, not for performance. So, I don't use any alerts in AppDynamics, Dynatrace, or any of the tools.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Most of the features are pretty good and the solution is user friendly."
"Kaseya Traverse is a very stable solution and very sustainable in terms of what the market wants, what is out there, price-wise and functionality features. They're quite competitive and they are always innovating."
"The remote support and data collection features are great."
"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."
"It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution."
"If I want to automate the management and maintenance of my server automatically, this product is a good use case for that."
"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."
"Working with the solution is very easy. It's user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to execute queries and analyze the data."
"The monitoring so far has been good and we are happy with it."
"The alert mechanism is quite accurate when something goes wrong in your system. For example, if you have hundreds of APIs on your server, and any of the APIs is not performing well, you get an alert. When there is a drop or change in the threshold value, the beauty of New Relic is that within a fraction of seconds, all the stakeholders who are configured in the New Relic system will get an alert. That's one good thing."
"It allows the restriction of privileges and control of users."
"New features are added often."
"We use it for monitoring, identifying when services go down, or when they are outside of what we would consider normal operations."
"The most valuable features of New Relic are the reports and ease of use."
 

Cons

"Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also."
"Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect."
"Reporting is a bit difficult."
"Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us."
"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."
"Improvement is needed in making it cheaper."
"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."
"However, the issue lies in the adequacy of the responses to my questions, which are usually not up to par."
"The UX/UI design of New Relic APM could be improved. The solution currently has some slow pages in terms of loading and viewing the pages, for example, the reports. The reports and other pages take a long time to load."
"I would like the ability to set up certain dummy accounts and do the actual things that the customer is doing, without impacting the production environment."
"It is a serious tool and requires a lot of time invested in order to understand how it works."
"The solution could improve by having more network monitoring features, such as for all the infrastructure."
"The solution only supports the cloud platform and not on-premises."
"One of the things that our enterprise actually had a challenge with was the licensing structure for New Relic."
"The scalability can be improved."
"There has been some problem with the agent, and it is just not working well. It is not able to record information with the application server. They have been able to fix the issue, but it took quite a long time. This is the main issue in the APM products and also in New Relic. The mobile application monitoring has been pretty difficult to set up and also quite expensive. It should be a little bit easier and cheaper. Because it is pretty difficult and expensive, many customers don't take it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The monthly cost os $1000 per server per month, but it could be even more. We pay about $250 for the server, and then New Relic wants over $1000 to give us statistics on those servers."
"We spend somewhere around $5,000 to $6,000 per month with an annual recommitment of maybe $60,000. These are just ballpark figures."
"The pricing is fine."
"If it’s the right tool, it doesn’t matter what it costs because you’re going to get it back many-fold from your productivity."
"I loved this product, but we can no longer afford it, so we dropped it."
"The product is neither cheap nor expensive, and I believe that it is a competitively-priced tool."
"This is an expensive product."
"The price of New Relic APM could be less expensive. We are using the New Relic APM pro account and it is more costly. When compared to competitors the solution's pricing should be much more realistic."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
25%
Non Profit
10%
Wholesaler/Distributor
9%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Kaseya Traverse?
The remote support and data collection features are great.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaseya Traverse?
The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive. We pay an annual license fee. There are no additional fees associated with the product.
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...
Any advice about APM solutions?
There are many factors and we know little about your requirements (size of org, technology stack, management systems, the scope of implementation). Our goal was to consolidate APM and infra monitor...
What do you like most about New Relic Insights?
The product's initial setup phase was very easy.
What needs improvement with New Relic Insights?
I reviewed another observability tool, DataDog, and we moved away from New Relic because the pricing was not convenient and didn't fit our budget. With DataDog, some of the APM features we were loo...
 

Also Known As

No data available
New Relic Browser, New Relic Applied Intelligence, New Relic Insights, New Relic Synthetics, New Relic Servers, New Relic APM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

UltiSat, Clear Concepts, nVidia, United States Postal Service, Cisco, Redbox, Spark Digital, People's Bank & Trust
World Fuel Services, Verizon, FootLocker, McDonald's, Trainline, Mondia Media, Confused, Costa Coffee, Ryanair, Marks & Spencer, William Hill, Delivery Hero, Skyscanner, BASF, DAZN, Veygo, Virtuo, movingimage, talabat, Australia Post, Tokopedia, Seven Network, Virgin Australia, Zomato, BigBasket, Mercado Libre, Lending Club
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaseya Traverse vs. New Relic and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.