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

LogicMonitor vs StableNet comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
6.8
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (8th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (8th), Container Monitoring (4th), Cloud Monitoring Software (5th), AIOps (6th)
StableNet
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
93rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.0%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of StableNet 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 (%)
LogicMonitor2.0%
StableNet0.4%
Other97.6%
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.
ShahzadAziz - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Development/Project Manager at Enablers Private Limited
A highly scalable and stable solution that provides excellent features and can be integrated with any product
The support team is more into R&D. They're not focused on support. The vendor lets the partners provide support for the solution. Partners must have StableNet-certified engineers. Complex problems arise for complex installations. When a problem is deep, it takes a lot of time to resolve it. It goes to the R&D and development teams. They do solve it, but the time taken could be reduced.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 very fine-tuned alerting that lets us know when there are issues by identifying where exactly that issue is, so we can troubleshoot and resolve them quickly. This is hopefully before the customer even notices. Then, it gives us some insight into potential issues coming down the road through our environmental health dashboards."
"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."
"It has had a solid impact and has helped us to resolve issues faster with everything in real time and the alerts."
"The most valuable feature of LogicMonitor is the infrastructure monitoring capability."
"Integrating LogicMonitor with ServiceNow has made things much faster, and when integrated, they work exceptionally well and help keep the business running smoothly."
"The plugins are easy to integrate, and LogicMonitor provides these add-ons for vendors like VMware. It becomes very easy to integrate them and take the data sources."
"What I appreciate about LogicMonitor is that it has a number of data sources and data points, which they call LogicModules."
"The best features are the reporting, utilization, and network graph."
"We can integrate any tool with StableNet."
"The solution is stable."
 

Cons

"The process of upgrading some of the collectors has been a little bit confusing. I need to understand that better."
"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 is a lack of automation, especially in terms of remediating problems. The problem is seen and identified, but there is a need and a gap where LogicMonitor can help us automate the remediation of the problem."
"LogicMonitor should always improve AI because we are always striving for real intelligence."
"The scalability of LogicMonitor is good, but it is challenging to have to spin up additional collectors all the time."
"We only use plain monitoring and do not use cloud monitoring such as Office 365 because it is too expensive."
"Automated remediation of issues has room for improvement. I don't know how best to handle it, but I know that they're kind of working on it. I know there are some resources that can do automated remediation. I would like them to improve this area so it could be completely hands-free, where it detects an issue, such as, if a CPU is running high. There are ways to do it even now, but it's a bit more involved."
"The solution is expensive."
"The existing dashboard capability is there, but it is not user-friendly."
"The dashboard has a lot of room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of pricing, I would rate LogicMonitor four out of five."
"They are expensive for the cloud."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
21%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction 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?
Currently, I do not see any improvements needed for LogicMonitor. Improvements depend on how the user engages with the tool, and this completely depends on the person using LogicMonitor.
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
In my opinion Infosim, StableNet Enterprise is the best as it is a third-generation highly automated network management system. It enables IT departments to unify the management requirements of the...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Kayak, Zendesk, Ted Baker, Trulia, Sophos, iVision, TekLinks, Siemens
Athenahealth, Barratt, Nocsult, Nucleus Connect, SCC
Find out what your peers are saying about LogicMonitor vs. StableNet and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.