We performed a comparison between Kaseya Traverse and SolarWinds AppOptics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The remote support and data collection features are great."
"Most of the features are pretty good and the solution is user friendly."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It's a simple and humble tool."
"Technical support is always live and they're supportive."
"The sum solution, NTA, and DPA."
"The product has a great dashboard."
"Some of the most valuable features of SolarWinds are the topology discovery and network performance analysis."
"I have found the most valuable feature is application performance management."
"The reporting of the solution is very good."
"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."
"We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product."
"Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us."
"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."
"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."
"Reporting is a bit difficult."
"AppOptics would benefit from having a much more centralized view."
"The integration with Unix services should be a bit more straightforward."
"The implementation needs improvement. It needs to get modernized with the newer cloud scenario in both public and private deployment models."
"I would like to see more integration with other tools that are available on the market."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"In terms of the technology, I think they need to put some more advanced troubleshooting into SolarWinds, in terms of AI capabilities. That's the next generation, especially in the cases of APIs which have already adopted AI capabilities into their products."
Kaseya Traverse is ranked 37th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 7 reviews while SolarWinds AppOptics is ranked 34th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 9 reviews. Kaseya Traverse is rated 6.6, while SolarWinds AppOptics is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Kaseya Traverse writes "A stable network monitoring tool requiring an easy initial setup phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds AppOptics writes "Unique features allow consolidating and combing metrics into a single dashboard, but don't monitor mobile solutions". Kaseya Traverse is most compared with LogicMonitor, Auvik Network Management (ANM), PRTG Network Monitor and SolarWinds NPM, whereas SolarWinds AppOptics is most compared with Dynatrace, SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor, Zabbix, Datadog and New Relic. See our Kaseya Traverse vs. SolarWinds AppOptics report.
See our list of best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
