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

Packetbeat vs ScienceLogic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Packetbeat
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
60th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
2.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ScienceLogic
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
29th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (7th), Unified Communications Monitoring (1st), Server Monitoring (14th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (19th), IT Operations Analytics (9th), Cloud Monitoring Software (13th), AIOps (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Packetbeat is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScienceLogic is 1.4%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ScienceLogic1.4%
Packetbeat0.3%
Other98.3%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Mohammed-Abdelalim - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Vice President at QualityKiosk Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Network analytics have delivered lightweight, integrated visibility for search, observability, and security
Packetbeat analyzes specific protocols and is not suitable for full capture of all network traffic and network flows. I recall that Packetbeat can cover a limited number of protocols including ICMP, but not as deeply as other solutions. It covers NetFlows and these types of flows, but not at the level of a deep packet capture that you can find in the market where it taps every single packet in the network. Packetbeat is more about bringing statistics about the packets, but it doesn't capture these packets. The development intention of Packetbeat appears to be to provide a window for application monitoring and performance analytics, and for that purpose, it is doing sufficiently well. However, if the vendor has another goal to build a similar network monitoring solution that exists in the market, which is outside of Elastic's business nature, Packetbeat is a sensor that needs to be improved to the level of deep packet capture where it loses no packets in the network. That improvement would take Elastic to another level.
Pallagani Siva Koteswararao - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Consultant at Tata Consultancy
Comprehensive monitoring streamlines operations with room for user support enhancement
I am interested in improving the flexibility of ScienceLogic's user interface, configuration, and customization. I am particularly keen on learning about issues raised by the ScienceLogic support team. Whenever we encounter difficulties, I raise vendor cases and am eager to deepen my understanding of those cases. Additionally, I want to learn more about ScienceLogic's dashboards, which display crucial metrics about collectors, their health, and devices aligned to them. The dashboard should be more detailed. Regarding improvements to ScienceLogic's technical support, my last company was IBM in India, and I worked on IBM MQ monitoring until my last day. I engaged with the LogicMonitor support team for MQ-level incidents, but these issues remained unresolved even after 10 to 15 days. On my last working day, I assisted with one such vendor case, and I am unsure if that issue was ever resolved. ScienceLogic's technical support should respond more efficiently in terms of time. During my time working on MQ-level cases, including a power pack upgrade that did not fix the issues faced, I provided all necessary steps with the help of the middleware team. However, there were still gaps that needed addressing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Elastic's scalability, in terms of cluster robustness, is definitely the most valuable feature."
"The beauty of Packetbeat is that it is easy, free, and lightweight, while other solutions are expensive and will accumulate a huge amount of data."
"It has allowed us to grow, as we’re able to offer new services to our customers that they didn't have in the past, opening a whole new door of monitoring offerings to our customers and what we can provide for them on top of what we already are providing."
"The many features offered for one price, including discovery, asset management, alerting, and ticketing, with simplified ease of integration across all features."
"Technical Support: The best I've ever experienced."
"Life before ScienceLogic was quite responsive, although we did managed services to a degree, they were more of a point in time check for the health of the client system rather than real time deep analysis, but now we’re able to resolve client problems not only before they have a problem but also, when we have to troubleshoot, we can look back in time and get a picture of what was going on with the network to avoid repeat occurrences."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing. There is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"ScienceLogic's custom enablement, which I can achieve as a Python developer, is unique."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing; there is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"ScienceLogic is an excellent all around suite of tools."
 

Cons

"Packetbeat analyzes specific protocols and is not suitable for full capture of all network traffic and network flows."
"The scalability of the agent itself could be improved."
"I would like to see an expansion of the API."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring; we definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"Reporting needs to be improved. It was sold as a tool we could use for our clients and it was a complete failure."
"The reporting module needs work."
"The reporting module needs work."
"They need a little more self-service."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing model for ScienceLogic could improve."
"It comes with the OS built in, so no need to purchase an OS license or DB license."
"I'm not the best person to discuss pricing, but what I do know is that it's a use-and-go structure. You use this much storage and pay this much for it. That's how it is. Every time, we continue to add a large amount of data to the environment."
"My company has an enterprise-level contract with ScienceLogic, so it is available to my organization at a good price."
"The solution is license-based. It's between $8 and $15, depending on what you need from the product."
"The license of ScienceLogic is based on how many endpoints are used. The number of monitoring points you want to have."
"Decide what you want to monitor and only monitor those items. Absorb other elements as you grow."
"Pricing between the two is quiet large therefore you can save some money if you don't require to collect all info on each device."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Packetbeat?
Elastic is pretty cheap for large enterprises but unaffordable for small ones.
What needs improvement with Packetbeat?
Packetbeat analyzes specific protocols and is not suitable for full capture of all network traffic and network flows. I recall that Packetbeat can cover a limited number of protocols including ICMP...
What is your primary use case for Packetbeat?
I have dealt with all of them: Elasticsearch, Kibana, Logstash, Beats, Elastic Agent, and Fleet, because I need to use all of them to achieve a solution for customers. These solutions are typically...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ScienceLogic?
ScienceLogic is not that expensive and is cost-effective overall.
What needs improvement with ScienceLogic?
I am interested in improving the flexibility of ScienceLogic's user interface, configuration, and customization. I am particularly keen on learning about issues raised by the ScienceLogic support t...
What is your primary use case for ScienceLogic?
Our usual use case of ScienceLogic is as a strategic monitoring tool for all the customers in our company, and because of that reason, all the accounts and projects are migrated from other monitori...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Kellogg Company, Booz Allen, Cisco, Red Bull, Fidelus, Telstra, Comcast, CSC, Peak 10, HughesNet, Hosting, Datapipe, US Army, Equinix, Rite Aid, Carbonite, Sybase, Carpathia, AT&T, ePlus, Dimension Data, Virtustream, Boeing, Honeywell
Find out what your peers are saying about Packetbeat vs. ScienceLogic and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.