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

LogicMonitor vs Marvis Virtual Network Assistant 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

LogicMonitor
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
6th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
34
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (13th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (8th), Container Monitoring (4th), Cloud Monitoring Software (7th), AIOps (5th)
Marvis Virtual Network Assi...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
49th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.3%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LogicMonitor2.3%
Marvis Virtual Network Assistant0.4%
Other97.3%
Network Monitoring Software
 

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.
PRADIPJOSHI - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at Shree Atharva Sales Corporation
Used for troubleshooting and receiving real-time alerts and works on artificial intelligence
I always recommend Marvis to every customer because it requires no additional direct involvement. Marvis has been developed well using AI and machine learning technology. Its AI engine updates itself regularly, which is a beneficial feature. I request that Juniper integrate a cloud identity engine and simplify the Microsoft Azure Active Directory Services integration with the SRX hardware firewall. Additionally, the SRX firewall needs a more robust graphical user interface. Currently, we can only configure the SRX using the CLI; if a wrong command is entered, restoring it cannot be easy. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by especially improving service reliability and user experience, and the dynamic alerting and root cause analysis have helped us fix issues before they cause a full-blown outage or degrade performance for end users."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by allowing us to implement it for 1,200 clients or 1,200 endpoints within three months, which went very well."
"The breadth of its ability to monitor all our environments, putting it in one place, has been helpful, so we don't have to manage multiple tools and try to juggle multiple balls to keep our environment monitored, and it presents a clear picture to us of what is going on."
"I really appreciate the reporting function because it allows me to create dashboards that will be emailed to me during the morning so that I have a complete overview of my client's health, within a specific time frame."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by cutting down white noise and false positives, allowing our team to be more proactive than reactive, which cuts down on the SLOs and SLAs we are trying to meet at all times."
"It’s more than just having a tool; it's something we can use day in, day out, giving us good insights to what is happening."
"LogicMonitor is very reliable compared to many other monitoring tools I have used, as each individual BGP session, IPsec tunnel, and interface is captured accurately and the logs are highly reliable."
"If you ask any questions about Marvis, it will respond immediately and use some solution. It will be very easy and save you time."
"Marvis Virtual Network Assistant uses AI to find problems or to get information from devices."
 

Cons

"One thing I would like to see is parent/child relationships and the ability to build a "suppression parent/child.""
"LogicMonitor should always improve AI because we are always striving for real intelligence. An additional feature we'd like to see in the next release of LogicMonitor is more in the area of identification of when the dominant workload is working. There are certain devices and applications that have cycles of their own. Some are used primarily during prime time, and some are used during the overnight timeframe, and better identification and classification of those workloads would be helpful. For example, we could then do some more planning about, for this particular set of devices, as it has a prime time environment, and we don't want to see a 24-hour average, as we want to see what is the 75th or 90th percentile utilization during the prime time when it is being used, whenever that prime time is."
"The process of upgrading some of the collectors has been a little bit confusing."
"Role-based permissions could be better and updating modules could be smoother."
"LogicMonitor's reporting capabilities definitely could use an improvement."
"Customer support is good, but escalations within customer support are not so good."
"There are some very specific things that need improvement in LogicMonitor. One is the lack of formatting for customized alerts, particularly the delivery of them to our email channel."
"It needs better access for customizing and adding monitoring from the repository. That would be helpful. It seems like you have to search through the forums to figure out what specific pieces you need to get in for specific monitoring, if it's a nonstandard piece of equipment or process. You have to hunt and find certain elements to get them in place. If they could make it a bit easier rather having to find the right six-digit code to put in so it implements, that would be helpful."
"It should add real-time application visibility."
"It would be a good idea to integrate the solution to support other vendors besides Juniper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They are expensive for the cloud."
"The licensing side of things with LogicMonitor, is quite simple. It is one license per device. Recently, you have additional licenses with things, like LM Cloud, which does confuse things a bit. Because it's very hard to estimate how many licenses you're going to need until you're monitoring it, so it's quite hard through that process to give a customer price to say, "This is how much this services will cost.""
"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."
"It's affordable. The price we get per license is a lot cheaper than what we were getting with some of the other tools. There are other monitoring tools out there that are cheaper, but what you get with LogicMonitor, out-of-the-box, makes it worth the cost."
"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."
"We pay for the enterprise tech support."
"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 tool's pricing falls into the middle range."
"Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is not an expensive solution."
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%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Healthcare Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
Retailer
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise11
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 do you like most about LogicMonitor?
LogicMonitor helps us prevent potential downtime. It's pretty good. It generates low-level warnings that aren't necessarily preemptive but can still alert us to issues we should investigate. These ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogicMonitor?
I researched the pricing of LogicMonitor, and it costs around ten dollars per device per month, which is somewhat expensive compared to other products. Some monitoring tools such as Zabbix are free...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is not an expensive solution. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
It should add real-time application visibility. Marvis's interface is good. We don't need any additional interface. However, if it could accept voice commands, that would be a great improvement
What is your primary use case for Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
It is mainly used for troubleshooting and receiving real-time alerts. Marvis makes it easy to track the issue by providing specific information, like the exact time the connection was lost. It simp...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Kayak, Zendesk, Ted Baker, Trulia, Sophos, iVision, TekLinks, Siemens
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about LogicMonitor vs. Marvis Virtual Network Assistant and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.