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

ManageEngine Applications Manager vs Portkey comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

ManageEngine Applications M...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
46th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (32nd)
Portkey
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
36th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of ManageEngine Applications Manager is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portkey is 0.3%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Portkey0.3%
ManageEngine Applications Manager0.8%
Other98.9%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

SN
Senior System Engineer at Qatar Petroleum
Managing application health has become simpler but new monitoring features still need faster delivery
I use application discovery and dependency mapping. It helps with managing application health What I like about ManageEngine Applications Manager is the ease of use and ease of deployment. I cannot remember anything specific for future updates of the product. The new features take a lot of time…
Shravan Revanna - PeerSpot reviewer
Product Engineer at a non-profit with 51-200 employees
Centralized AI control has standardized our workflows and delivers faster, more reliable features
There are definitely some places where Portkey can be improved. Overall, the experience has been positive, but the first area is analytics and reporting. While the observability feature is excellent, we would like to have richer historical analytics and customizable dashboards. For example, it would be useful to see trends by applications and teams or features over long periods without exporting data to an external BI tool. Another area is governance for large organizations. As AI adoption grows, enterprises need more granular, role-based access control. We would like to see more advanced AI evaluation capability built into the platform itself, including features such as prompt versioning and automated quality scoring and regression testing. Finally, while the platform is supported with multiple providers, we would welcome even more intelligent routing capabilities, such as automatically selecting the best model based on latency, cost, and task complexity using configurable policies. These are not major pain points, but they are enhancements that would make an already strong platform even more valuable for an organization that scales their AI workloads. Documentation and onboarding could be enhanced. Portkey is developer-friendly, but we need more end-to-end references, architecture, and implementation guides for common AI patterns. This would help teams adopt it even faster. I did not give Portkey a perfect score because while it has become a foundational component in our AI stack and solves several operational challenges, I would still like to see deeper analytics, stronger enterprise governance features, and more built-in AI evaluation capabilities, especially for prompt testing, regression analysis, and model benchmarking. I would be comfortable recommending Portkey to any organization that is building multiple AI applications or wants to manage a scalable way to handle LLM providers and produce AI traffic.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I used it extensively for a year, and prior to that, I was very comfortable."
"The most valuable features are: Takes care of all IT monitoring in one console: Server, apps and business services."
"What I like about ManageEngine Applications Manager is the ease of use and ease of deployment."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"If cost is your consideration and you have a well-rounded system administrator, this is a good product to explore."
"I am impressed with the tool's reporting feature which is simple."
"The initial setup was straightforward, without complexity."
"Its price and the flexibility to deploy are the most valuable. Flexibility is very important, and you can scale from very basic to more complex. This solution is a part of a complete suite of management tools. So, it can be integrated with other solutions for monitoring networks, which is very important. You can expand it or interconnect it with many other tools, which is a powerful feature. We have a very good and long relationship with ManageEngine support guys. They provide very good support for us."
"Portkey has significantly improved the organization by streamlining the AI processes being followed."
"Overall, Portkey has had a huge business impact in terms of cost savings and operational efficiency."
"Portkey is totally stable; it is one of the best software solutions in the market for this purpose."
"Portkey definitely provides a solid alternative solution for the agent and large model hosting platforms, and it is very helpful for us to explore the possibilities across the industry rather than staying with a few mainstream options."
 

Cons

"The dashboards in the interface need a lot of work."
"I would say that the implementation of ManageEngine Applications Manager is too detailed. You need some training to effectually use it."
"They could probably rearrange the UI so that it would be easy for people who are new to the Application Manager to configure things."
"The agent often crashes when there is too much load on the application side. If a sudden storm of data comes in, the agent crashes down most of the time."
"I would like the solution to improve the ability to track services."
"At the moment, we are not finding this solution to be very stable. We've had a lot of calls with the vendor to sort things out."
"The information provided by ManageEngine is not deep-dive like IBM and CA provide."
"They can improve the post-processing of the data. AppDynamics has more powerful tools for post-processing or analytics. It has some limitations in more complex environments, but because we are free to use different solutions, we try to find what is best for the customers or the problem we are trying to solve."
"However, one thing I would like to say is that it could have better documentation."
"There are definitely some places where Portkey can be improved."
"One major problem I see with Portkey is that when I had not yet started any trial, it started to denote that I had exceeded the prompt limit."
"The main area for improvement is onboarding and trial experience."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's licensing costs are yearly."
"Its price is good."
"The solution is noted for its cost-effectiveness, a crucial consideration for potential users."
"The cost of this solution is not too bad, although it could be cheaper considering what you're getting for the price."
"The licensing costs for ManageEngine Applications Manager are around $1,200 per year. For additional monitors, you have to pay extra."
"Price-wise, it is a cheap tool...The solution's licensing model is subscription-based, in which yearly payments are to be made."
"The annual licensing depends on the number of monitors you have connected. Once you get to two hundred monitors you can see the price reflect."
"It is a cost-effective solution."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise10
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ManageEngine Applications Manager?
I am satisfied with the licensing cost for ManageEngine Applications Manager.
What needs improvement with ManageEngine Applications Manager?
The new features take a lot of time to be implemented, and that could be improved about ManageEngine Applications Manager. If I were requesting a new feature that is not existing, making it availab...
What is your primary use case for ManageEngine Applications Manager?
I use application discovery and dependency mapping. It helps with managing application health.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portkey?
Portkey is requiring production to be $49, I guess that is US dollars per month for 100K logs. I would say it is manageable.
What needs improvement with Portkey?
One major problem I see with Portkey is that when I had not yet started any trial, it started to denote that I had exceeded the prompt limit. Users are usually expecting a trial stage with more tok...
What is your primary use case for Portkey?
Our team is searching for an alternative to LiteLLM, which is another monitoring management platform, and we found that Portkey is an alternative solution that we decided to try out. We want to con...
 

Also Known As

Applications Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Certis Europe, Financial Domain, SaaS Office Suite, On Demand TV, Parliament's IT Systems, Sastra Technologies, UniServity
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about ManageEngine Applications Manager vs. Portkey and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.