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
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (10th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (8th), Container Monitoring (4th), Cloud Monitoring Software (6th), AIOps (6th)
Marvis Virtual Network Assi...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
53rd
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 July 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.1%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LogicMonitor2.1%
Marvis Virtual Network Assistant0.4%
Other97.5%
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

"Compared to other monitoring platforms I've used in the past, LogicMonitor seems to be the most powerful and robust that I've dealt with."
"It is a really solid tool for the on-premises, physical and virtual infrastructure; I have had nothing but good things to say about it, and it has been a pleasure using it for those use cases."
"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 warnings allow us to correlate data and identify areas where we should take action, even if the issues aren't critical."
"LogicMonitor improved on-premises infrastructure monitoring in several ways. One key feature was dynamic resource allocation, although we didn't utilize it much in our system. The main functionalities we benefited from were email alerts, network mapping, and dashboards."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"Another feature from the technical aspect, the back-end, is the ability to allow individual users or customers to have their own APIs. They're able to make changes using the plugins covered by LogicMonitor. That is a very powerful feature that is more attractive to our techno-savvy customers."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted my organization by reducing network monitoring time and the overall time spent on reviewing the switches and network-related concerns."
"LogicMonitor basically gives you the ability to monitor the infrastructure side of your application ecosystem."
"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

"LogicMonitor tends to continuously ping the servers and the environment, which can create a lot of false alerts."
"I'd like to see more automation in the tool, especially around remediation."
"One thing that could be really better is the mapping. Auvik is really good at it."
"We would like to see more functionality around mapping of topologies, in terms of networks. An improvement that we would like to see is added functionality to get more detail out of mapping. For example, if the LogicMonitor Collector identifies a connection between two network endpoints, it would be great to actually see which ports are connecting the two endpoints together. That functionality is something we greatly desire. It would actually make our documentation more dynamic in the sense that we wouldn't need to manually document. If this is something that the platform could provide, then this would be a great asset."
"LogicMonitor has a few areas that need improvement, such as more simplified customization for advanced monitoring, better pricing flexibility for smaller organizations, improved reporting templates, and an easier onboarding process for beginners."
"While dynamic alerting is great, the overall alerting system can be complex to configure."
"Dashboarding capabilities could be enhanced. It is cumbersome, you must do it all at once, and then you must repeat the process every now and then."
"One thing I would like to see is parent/child relationships and the ability to build a "suppression parent/child.""
"It would be a good idea to integrate the solution to support other vendors besides Juniper."
"It should add real-time application visibility."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"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."
"We've had customers who have reduced their costs by not having multiple platforms for monitoring. That said, especially with super-large environments, the cost model for LogicMonitor is the one area where we run into issues."
"It's an enterprise-grade solution and competitively priced compared to the other solutions that are out there... Our organization is not huge, but LogicMonitor is worth every penny that we pay for it. I've never heard anyone say, "I'm not sure that we're getting good value for money from this product." It's integral to our business."
"LogicMonitor is competitively priced at the same level as other vendors, like Datadog."
"I know we are saving at least several hundred thousand dollars in that we're not buying Cisco Prime."
"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.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
Healthcare Company
18%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise29
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?
I do not manage the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for LogicMonitor.
What needs improvement with LogicMonitor?
LogicMonitor tends to continuously ping the servers and the environment, which can create a lot of false alerts. Another thing is that it is not very good for application monitoring.LogicMonitor ca...
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: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.