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

LogicMonitor vs Loom Systems comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

LogicMonitor
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (8th), Network Monitoring Software (7th), Container Monitoring (4th), Cloud Monitoring Software (5th), AIOps (6th)
Loom Systems
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
67th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Anomaly Detection Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.6%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Loom Systems is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LogicMonitor2.6%
Loom Systems0.5%
Other96.9%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Keerthi Kumar Sangaraju - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Stable, easy to set up, flexible, and has multiple functionalities, but needs to define priority levels for each incident
What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"LogicMonitor enables us to consistently really wow the customers by sorting that out."
"It is easy to set up and monitor an entire facility. This is crucial because we have around 80 facilities that require monitoring. LifePoint is a hub-and-spoke environment, so it is essential to understand all of the WAN interfaces."
"The dashboarding is very useful. Being able to create custom data sources is one of its biggest features which allows quick time to market with new features. If one of our vendors changes their data format or metrics that we should be monitoring, then we can quickly adjust to any changes in the environment in order to get a great user experience for our customers."
"We have definitely seen return on our investment with LogicMonitor, especially once we showed how we could replace that Prognosis tool with it."
"LogicMonitor has more features compared to CloudWatch in terms of real-time alerting, log ingestion, alerting, visualization dashboards, and complaint support."
"LogicMonitor has a very highly talented support team that can answer the questions and help the customer right away."
"Automation has reduced the manual work to minus, which lets our team members focus on more strategic projects and not the repetitive tasks."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by reducing our volume of incidents that we work on."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."
"Bringing Loom in ensures that the incident process, request process, change, all of these processes are improved."
"The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"The solution is very scalable; a company wouldn't have any issues expanding it if they needed to, and we have a few thousand users on the solution."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"The solution is absolutely scalable."
 

Cons

"The main area for improvement is that if LogicMonitor's UI were a bit more user-friendly, that would be more useful."
"The container monitoring seems to be really behind compared to some bespoke cloud-native monitoring solutions that are designed around Kubernetes, containers, and ephemeral environments."
"It has limited access to financial resources."
"Additionally, it times out after every couple of minutes, perhaps 20 or 30 minutes."
"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."
"Role-based permissions could be better and updating modules could be smoother."
"Their Logs feature is quite new. It is not as feature-rich as we would like it to be. There have been a couple of conversations internally around other log management tools, like Splunk, which may do more for us than LM Logs. The benefit of LogicMonitor is that our staff know how to use it, so we don't really want to move away from it, if we don't have to. I fully expect there to be more development in this area. It is their newest feature, so it is understandable that it hasn't evolved as some of the other stuff. It would be good to see a bit more development in this area, but I think the monitoring side of things is spot on."
"We would like to see more functionality around mapping of topologies, in terms of networks."
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident."
"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy, especially in the initial setup which can take six months of work, especially when you have a large estate that you're dealing with."
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"The reporting is a bit weak."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It definitely pays for itself in the amount of time we're not spending with false errors or things that we haven't quite dealt with monitoring. It has been good cost-wise."
"We pay for the enterprise tech support."
"As a managed service provider, we have the highest level of licensing that they offer, so we don't have any extra fees. I believe there are some add-ons for some of the lower tiers of LogicMonitor service, but that's not something that we use with our agreement."
"In terms of pricing, I would rate LogicMonitor four out of five."
"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."
"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."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
24%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise32
No data available
 

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 think LogicMonitor can be improved by having alert prioritization. Sometimes important alerts get delayed while unimportant alerts come through, so prioritization would help address this issue. A...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Kayak, Zendesk, Ted Baker, Trulia, Sophos, iVision, TekLinks, Siemens
Citrix, Amdocs, Sysaid, Hexaware, Effibar, Revtrak, Taptica
Find out what your peers are saying about LogicMonitor vs. Loom Systems and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.