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

ScienceLogic vs StableNet 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

ScienceLogic
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
14th
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 (10th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (14th), IT Operations Analytics (4th), Cloud Monitoring Software (14th), AIOps (9th)
StableNet
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
92nd
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 April 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of ScienceLogic is 1.3%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of StableNet is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ScienceLogic1.3%
StableNet0.3%
Other98.4%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

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.
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

"Web monitoring, service and processes monitoring have saved and prevented more than just one outage."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"It has a lot of integration capabilities as well; we can integrate with a lot of things, monitor emails and APIs, handle customization and automation, and there is a great dashboard with many features to take advantage of."
"ScienceLogic is multi-tenant from the ground up, starting at the code level."
"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 customer service and support has been the best of any vendor I have had experience dealing with in my professional history."
"ScienceLogic was good at proactively identifying problems and could turn a 45-minute outage into a 20-minute outage or even catch early warning signs and solve issues in advance."
"It is simple."
"The solution is stable."
"We can integrate any tool with StableNet."
"The best features are the reporting, utilization, and network graph."
 

Cons

"ScienceLogic is working towards a kind of AI, DKAIRA enablement, but I find one dependency is the frequent need to rely on professional services."
"Use the professional services proposed solution to support private MIBs, we are encountering what appears to be poling time outs, which creates false positives."
"They need a little more self-service."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"Before ScienceLogic, our monitoring was fairly difficult to do. We were kind of limited in our capabilities."
"We often face bugs when there's a new release."
"Error information doesn’t have a good information if something goes wrong while doing a device discovery (I tried this a while back- couldn’t be more specific)."
"The solution is expensive."
"The dashboard has a lot of room for improvement."
"The existing dashboard capability is there, but it is not user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Plan for adding more to it. Once you see EM7 in action, you will want to keep adding systems to monitor."
"Decide what you want to monitor and only monitor those items. Absorb other elements as you grow."
"The license of ScienceLogic is based on how many endpoints are used. The number of monitoring points you want to have."
"The pricing model for ScienceLogic could improve."
"The solution is license-based. It's between $8 and $15, depending on what you need from the product."
"My company has an enterprise-level contract with ScienceLogic, so it is available to my organization at a good price."
"It comes with the OS built in, so no need to purchase an OS license or DB license."
"Its price could be lower, but for what you pay, you got a lot of value from its features and functionalities. Customers always want a discount or a cheaper solution."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise24
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ScienceLogic?
The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support.
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 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...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
Athenahealth, Barratt, Nocsult, Nucleus Connect, SCC
Find out what your peers are saying about ScienceLogic vs. StableNet and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.