Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ManageEngine Applications Manager vs Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 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

ManageEngine Applications M...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
42nd
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
35th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Turbo360 (Formerly Serverle...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
69th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
49th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (53rd), Cloud Cost Management (31st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of ManageEngine Applications Manager is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ManageEngine Applications Manager0.6%
Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360)0.3%
Other99.1%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Ossama Arab - PeerSpot reviewer
Anomaly detection maintains the system's health and good for monitoring
The primary use case is for services and incident management.   The anomaly detection feature helps with maintaining the system's health. It is regarding our IT incident center.  ManageEngine is for incident management and monitoring.  The inventory of assets needs improvement. The asset…
reviewer1868589 - PeerSpot reviewer
Great topic subscription monitoring, helpful management, and useful for audits
Addition of more monitoring features to Azure Cosmos DB can be a huge help as we use the same as the main database for our applications. One more thing to note is that their support team was always ready to clear all our doubts regarding the product but we feel that it would be much appreciated if they could share with us the required resources to get new customers like us well-versed in traversing through different modules of the product. These are the very few areas where Serverless360 can be improved.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The Service Level Management (SLM) rules engine stands out due to its flexibility and customization capabilities, making it an invaluable tool for tailoring processes to our specific needs."
"ManageEngine Applications Manager's installation is pretty easy."
"The initial setup was straightforward, without complexity."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to be able to monitor Kubernetes."
"What I like most about ManageEngine Applications Manager is its price point, apart from its technicalities. The solution is cheaper than its competitors. ManageEngine Applications Manager has helpful documentation that makes setting it up straightforward."
"I am impressed with the tool's reporting feature which is simple."
"ManageEngine Applications Manager maintains the historical data and it's easy for us to analyze the trends and patterns and fix them accordingly."
"The anomaly detection feature helps with maintaining the system's health. It is regarding our IT incident center."
"Service Bus topic subscription monitoring turned out to be the most useful for us."
"It offers all the core capabilities we need to manage and monitor our Azure services."
 

Cons

"An area for improvement in ManageEngine Applications Manager is artificial intelligence. If AI is integrated into the solution, it'll be a piece of cake. Currently, it's all configured manually."
"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."
"The problem is that implementation requires a significant amount of mapping effort."
"I would like the solution to improve the ability to track services."
"The information provided by ManageEngine is not deep-dive like IBM and CA provide."
"They could probably rearrange the UI so that it would be easy for people who are new to the Application Manager to configure things."
"Lacks an SIEM solution which can be found in other products."
"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."
"The user interface of Serveress360 could be improved a bit to make the platform even easier to use."
"Addition of more monitoring features to Azure Cosmos DB can be a huge help as we use the same as the main database for our applications."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"ManageEngine Applications Manager has reasonable pricing. It's more affordable than other solutions in the market. My company has an instance-based license for ManageEngine Applications Manager. You can purchase a yearly subscription or a perpetual license. The standard license covers most features, but you can still have some paid add-ons."
"The solution's licensing costs are yearly."
"The solution is noted for its cost-effectiveness, a crucial consideration for potential users."
"It is a cost-effective solution."
"Its price is good."
"The cost of this solution is not too bad, although it could be cheaper considering what you're getting for the price."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
869,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
27%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Performing Arts
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise9
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ManageEngine Applications Manager?
The solution is noted for its cost-effectiveness, a crucial consideration for potential users.
What needs improvement with ManageEngine Applications Manager?
The integration process with third party tools poses some challenges; enhancing the robustness of these integrations could greatly improve overall functionality and user experience.
What is your primary use case for ManageEngine Applications Manager?
Our primary application of this solution revolves around IT infrastructure monitoring. We focus on alert consolidation from core network and service levels to enhance our service management framework.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Applications Manager
Serverless360
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Certis Europe, Financial Domain, SaaS Office Suite, On Demand TV, Parliament's IT Systems, Sastra Technologies, UniServity
MSC, Transalta, Rank Group, RACQ, BBC, Q2 Solutions, Middleway, BUPA, Columbia Sportswear, EDF
Find out what your peers are saying about ManageEngine Applications Manager vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.