Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
Buyer's Guide
Network Monitoring Software
September 2022
Get our free report covering Zabbix, ManageEngine, Paessler AG, and other competitors of SolarWinds NPM. Updated: September 2022.
634,775 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of SolarWinds NPM alternatives and competitors

VENKATESHREDDY - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate IT Director at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Simple and easy to use, and has good probe server and reporting features
Pros and Cons
  • "The features we found most valuable in ManageEngine OpManager are the probe server and reporting because they're pretty good features."
  • "What I'd like ManageEngine OpManager to improve on is artificial intelligence. In particular, the machine learning feature should be integrated with the sensor flow. Doing this will give leverage, especially when you look at other products such as the Cisco DNA Center. When a switch goes down, I should be able to build on the correlation of other physical devices it's connected to so that I can integrate that with my CA CMDB. The ManageEngine OpManager team needs to draw a long-term roadmap where that feature becomes an integral part of the solution because right now, machine learning in ManageEngine OpManager is a long process. The solution doesn't have MLS search and I want to see ML being developed and applied for CA CMDB to greatly reduce the burden of tying everything. For example, if I have a data center switch that goes down now, I should know what server it's connected to, and when that switch goes down at twenty-four ports, I would get twenty-four alerts for different devices plugged in. I should be able to make a correlation that the major problem lies in the switch and not with the twenty-four elements connected to that switch. That is where machine learning should come into play and the ManageEngine OpManager AI should indicate "This is where the root of your problem is." It could be difficult, but this is a feature that should be improved or added to the solution."

What is most valuable?

The features we found most valuable in ManageEngine OpManager are the probe server and reporting because they're pretty good features.

What needs improvement?

What I'd like ManageEngine OpManager to improve on is artificial intelligence.  In particular, the machine learning feature should be integrated with the sensor flow. Doing this will give leverage, especially when you look at other products such as the Cisco DNA Center. When a switch goes down, I should be able to build on the correlation of other physical devices it's connected to so that I can integrate that with my CA CMDB. The ManageEngine OpManager team needs to draw a long-term roadmap where that feature becomes an integral part of the solution because right now, machine learning in ManageEngine OpManager is a long process. The solution doesn't have MLS search and I want to see ML being developed and applied for CA CMDB to greatly reduce the burden of tying everything.

For example, if I have a data center switch that goes down now, I should know what server it's connected to, and when that switch goes down at twenty-four ports, I would get twenty-four alerts for different devices plugged in. I should be able to make a correlation that the major problem lies in the switch and not with the twenty-four elements connected to that switch. That is where machine learning should come into play and the ManageEngine OpManager AI should indicate "This is where the root of your problem is."  It could be difficult, but this is a feature that should be improved or added to the solution.

What I'd like to see in the next version of ManageEngine OpManager is for the machine learning and AI to be tied with the correlation engine because, at the moment, the existing correlation is lacking in terms of contextual awareness. Contextual awareness has to be more customized so that the operator or the person building or customizing the tool should have the flexibility to tie it with the CA CMDB application and the underlying inventory. This way, ManageEngine OpManager becomes more of a straightforward, next-generation solution concerning monitoring. For example, another player like New Relic has an application management module that's far ahead, but it's still lagging and would still need to catch up in terms of managing needs.

ManageEngine OpManager has integrations through APIs, but still needs further enhancement because there are still certain applications that would take hits, so the level of contextual awareness needs to be built on more, and that takes time.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using ManageEngine OpManager for about one year now.

How are customer service and support?

I found the support for ManageEngine OpManager fantastic. I've called the support team several times, and the team always came back to me immediately. There wasn't any delay with the response, and whenever there was a feature that my company felt was missing in ManageEngine OpManager, the product engineering team would include that in the roadmap. The team also indicated other features still being worked on and what has been worked on. My interaction with the ManageEngine OpManager support team has been good so far. There's no doubt about it.

Presale, after-sales, and whenever there's an issue, I would rate the support provided by the product engineers of ManageEngine OpManager as five out of five. I would recommend the solution in terms of the support provided because, in comparison with other products, the support team listens to the customers. It's been a nice experience for me, so far.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

My company has been comparing products and found out that it's better to stick with the existing product, ManageEngine OpManager, instead of going with another because now the team knows about the issues and downsides and how to address those.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup for ManageEngine OpManager was very simple. It was very, very easy. On a scale of one to five, with five being very easy and one being very difficult, my rating for the setup is four out of five.

What was our ROI?

Concerning the ROI from ManageEngine OpManager, we're very happy and satisfied because we didn't have to pay for additional overheads, particularly because we now don't need that many admins, so we were able to save. We're able to run the show with just three operators.

On a scale of one to five, with one being the worst and five being the best, I would rate the ROI we get from ManageEngine OpManager as four out of five.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Pricing for ManageEngine OpManager depends on the number of nodes you onboard and whatever pricing is reflected on the ManageEngine portal which offers discounts from ten percent to fifteen percent. It purely depends on the sales volume and the negotiation.

In my organization, there are about one thousand two hundred nodes which cost around $29,000 per year. There's no additional support fee or maintenance fee from ManageEngine OpManager.

Pricing for the solution is highly competitive and I would rate it five out of five. ManageEngine OpManager is one of the most competitive options out there.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I did a small POC on SolarWinds, and unfortunately, the supply chain code got hacked and that impacted other SolarWinds products a lot. SolarWinds took a beating, and if that hack didn't happen and there wasn't much impact on other product lines, SolarWinds would be the clear winner over ManageEngine OpManager. Price-wise and support-wise, both solutions are good, but because of the hack, there is a security concern with SolarWinds, and this was a major reason to push back on SolarWinds, otherwise, my company would have gone with that solution.

I also compared ScienceLogic with ManageEngine OpManager, and though ScienceLogic has its engine, the engine fails whenever I try to build custom reports that my customers need. In ManageEngine OpManager, on the other hand, the process is simple. You just export it to a CSV format and you can do whatever you want with your other tools, so it's very easy, but in ScienceLogic, doing it would take a lot of time because of the connectors.

ManageEngine OpManager works better than other solutions because you don't need to be a guru to do simple tasks on it.

What other advice do I have?

I'm currently using ManageEngine OpManager.

Within my organization, thirty people use ManageEngine OpManager daily. The solution is being supported 24 x 7.

In terms of maintenance, a stable code is released every six months, so my team has to go back and plan it accordingly, which means keeping all the servers redundant. During the design process itself, the ManageEngine OpManager team did indicate that every quarter, certain packages would be released because the solution is dependent on Java and other frameworks, so it needs to be patched accordingly. Whenever a new patch is released, or there's a major code release at the design level, you need to keep servers more redundant, so you won't run into any issues, and this has helped my company reduce downtime. The monitoring has been always available and ManageEngine OpManager has never gone down. Only one staff is required for its maintenance.

My advice to others looking into implementing the solution is that if you're a legacy customer and you have budget constraints, ManageEngine OpManager is the way to go because it's a very simple solution for deployment, monitoring, and device availability. Though other competitors have advanced features, if I'm not using those features, then it doesn't matter. I'll be better of with ManageEngine OpManager because it's simple to use.

My rating for ManageEngine OpManager is eight out of ten.

My company is a customer of ManageEngine OpManager, not a partner.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Head of Data Architect at LendingTree
Real User
Top 20
Instantaneous response when monitoring logs and KPIs
Pros and Cons
  • "CloudWatch immediately hooks up and connects to the KPIs and all the metrics."
  • "It would be beneficial for CloudWatch to provide an API interface and some kind of custom configuration."

What is our primary use case?

We use the solution to monitor our AWS resources. We used Azure extensively but a couple of years back we moved to use both Azure and AWS. Currently, we have three main use cases. 

Our predominant use case is monitoring our S3 which includes terabytes of data. We monitor all the buckets and containers plus who has access to them, the thresholds, and user data. We constantly watch all the KPIs and CloudWatch metrics. 

Our second use case is watching logs and processes for other products such as AWS tools, AWS Glue, and Redshift which includes a few terabytes of data.

Our third use case is minor and with Athena.

Our fourth use case is new. We just started using SageMaker for a small POC and want to complete all of our data modeling and logs.

In the future, we will be using the solution with Airflow, which will become one of our biggest use cases. 

CloudWatch works very well with any of the AWS resources so we always monitor through it.

How has it helped my organization?

Our business flow has improved because we monitor email thresholds and immediately get an alert from CloudWatch if use goes beyond thresholds. Without this alert, we would have to use external monitoring. 

What is most valuable?

It is valuable that CloudWatch collects all the metrics. I primarily like the RUM. There is an instantaneous response when monitoring logs and KPIs. CloudWatch immediately hooks up and connects to the KPIs and all the metrics. 

What needs improvement?

Even though the product works well with most AWS, it is a nightmare to use with Snowflake. Snowflake is a SaaS product hosted on AWS, but using it with CloudWatch still doesn't give us the support we need so we rely on separate monitoring. 

We have many databases such as MongoDB and SQL Server, RDS, and PostgreSQL. For these, CloudWatch is good but a little basic and additional monitoring tools are required. It's challenging to use one monitoring tool for S3 and another monitoring tool for Snowflake. 

It would be beneficial for CloudWatch to provide an API interface and some kind of custom configuration because everybody uses APIs now. Suppose Snowflake says we'd get all the same things with MongoDB such as APIs, hookups, or even monitoring. That would allow us to build our own custom solution because that is the biggest limitation of CloudWatch. If you go a bit beyond AWS products even if they're hosted on AWS, CloudWatch doesn't work very well. 

I'd also like an improved UI because it hasn't significantly improved in a few years and we want to see it at a more granular level. I get my KPIs in a bucket usage for yesterday but I'd like to see them by a particular date and week. We have three buckets rolled by hundreds of people and I want to see use cases for an individual to determine where I need to customize and provide more room. I want aggregation on multiples, not one terameter. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for two years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable with absolutely no issues. We used to see a delay when we were setting up three buckets but now we receive instantaneous notifications. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is definitely scalable. Most of our development environment uses it and we are running three teams of 150-200 people. Usage levels are different between developers and the support team so the total users at one time is 100-150. 

The solution is managed by our internal AWS maintenance team. Seven people manage our cloud environment and seven manage our platform side for not just CloudWatch, but everything on AWS.

We still need to find a solution for Snowflake and Tableau environments unless CloudWatch provides better support in the future. 

How are customer service and support?

The support staff are seasoned professionals and are good. Amazon provides the benchmark for support and nothing else compares.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

On-premises, we have used other solutions like Sumo Logic, Azure Logic Apps and others. Not everyone uses AWS so we have a lot of tools we use.

Previously we used some main external app logic but it didn't work well with AWS tools. I would have to figure it out and configure Aurora to do something or find a way to do S3 buckets. Those solutions worked well for on-premises, but not with AWS and clouds.

How was the initial setup?

The setup for this solution is pretty simple and anyone can do it if they are on AWS. Setting up all our VPC and private links connecting to our gateways took some time, but CloudWatch setup was a no-brainer and took a couple of days. 

What about the implementation team?

Our implementation was done in conjunction with a third party. We like to bring in a few engineers to work with our engineers and then we partner with a third party like Slalom to help with integration. Our process is a mix of all three with AWS staff helping for a couple of weeks and Slalom for a couple of months. Our team slowly takes over management. 

What was our ROI?

We plan to increase our usage because we don't have another monitoring tool right now. With the Airflow orchestration, our CloudWatch use will significantly increase as we monitor all of our RUM, notifications, jobs, and runs. Our runs and billings will increase 20-30% once we start using Airflow. 

Because CloudWatch doesn't support all externally hosted products, I rate it a nine out of ten for ROI. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't know specifics about pricing because we pay for all our AWS services in a monthly bundle and that includes CloudWatch, Redshift, VPCs, EC2s, S3s, A39s, and others. We spend about $5 million per year on AWS with CloudWatch being about 5% of that cost. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I did not evaluate other solutions. Once we moved to AWS, we looked for a tool that was native to that cloud. That is the process we are currently undertaking for Snowflake and Tableau because CloudWatch doesn't support them well. We do try to use CloudWatch as much as possible. 

What other advice do I have?

The solution is pretty good because it automatically comes and works well with AWS. Before you use any product from AWS, think about whether it is supported or how it will interface. I suggest using the solution with one product at a time and then transitioning to important interfaces. 

If you find you can't configure the solution with Redshift for example, and are struggling to build your S3 even though both use S3, then you may have to find another monitoring solution. It makes sense to follow Amazon's best practices. They advise not to use certain monitoring components alone but to use them as an integral part of your system. Monitor your ecosystem and think of a high-level picture of it rather than just determining that CloudWatch must be a part of Redshift. This solution is just one part of an entire system. 

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Henry-Steinhauer - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Engineer at LifePoint Health
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
They have an active community of users who are willing to share their experiences and how they have extended the solution to do unusual things.
Pros and Cons
  • "It is easy to set up and monitor an entire facility. This is crucial because we have around 80 facilities that require monitoring. LifePoint is a hub-and-spoke environment, so it is essential to understand all of the WAN interfaces."
  • "LogicMonitor can easily easy to pull data from one item at a time. I have yet to find a good way to get LogicMonitor to show me all the WAN devices and how they're doing in terms of capacity."

What is our primary use case?

We are a network of hospitals using the solution to monitor our network devices and all of the interfaces connected to them. It's predominantly instances of applications running on Windows Server. We use the Windows WMI for Windows Server stats.

The IT directors at our hospitals use it, so we have around 90 end-users Some of them have extended the monitoring capabilities to printers to stay on top of toner supplies. In the past, we've had admin people freaking out because the printer is out of toner, and we have any in the closet. Nobody was watching that, and some people would be hoarding supplies.

How has it helped my organization?

LogicMonitor replaced SolarWinds after a security breach.  We work with a network service provider that owns all of the network devices, and we had some issues with total inventory control. We're a monitoring site, so we're not necessarily on the operational side and we're out of the loop sometimes when things are changing.

What is most valuable?

It is easy to set up and monitor an entire facility. This is crucial because we have around 80 facilities that require monitoring. LifePoint is a hub-and-spoke environment, so it is essential to understand all of the WAN interfaces.

What needs improvement?

I'm a learn-by-example person, so it would be nice to have a cookbook for enterprise management. They have a rich API process, but there aren't many examples of how to do enterprise-style work. It is peculiar about how to do it for one device, but not necessarily thousands.

LogicMonitor can effortlessly pull data from one item at a time. I have yet to find an excellent way to get LogicMonitor to show me all the WAN devices and how they're doing in terms of capacity.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using LogicMonitor for 18 months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

LogicMonitor has been stable so far. There has been a learning curve, where we had to allocate more resources to a collector doing work. At the same time, it has been relatively easy to stand up more of them.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scaling is a matter of adding more collectors to the environment. If you've discovered too many devices, you have to rebalance the collectors. However, if you add more collectors into a sphere, you don't need to worry about doing the load balancing by yourself. You let the mechanics do it for you.

How are customer service and support?

I rate LogicMonitor support nine out of 10. They have a button on all of the webpages that says "Contact Support," so you can do that online or submit a ticket. Both have worked well.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I was a big user of SolarWinds before. It was easy to pull data out of SolarWinds and then put it into other tools for big-picture analysis across the entire enterprise as opposed to an individual device.

How was the initial setup?

Setting up LogicMonitor isn't very complex. We quickly learned that we could do some collector load balancing. As we're adding devices to a series of collectors, it can do its own load balancing to ensure you don't have too much on one server doing S&P polling. 

What about the implementation team?

We did most of the work ourselves.

What was our ROI?

We've certainly seen a return. One of the features we use extensively is Netflow, which helps us better understand what is consumed in the WAN environment. For example, we can determine that the DICOM processing is unnecessarily using up the WAN. It can go over a Meraki network, which is an encrypted process going over the general internet. We have highly secure Opt-E-WAN environments that most traffic goes over, but we also use the public internet to send other encrypted data.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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. 

What other advice do I have?

I rate LogicMonitor eight out of 10. It's easy to add new features to LogicMonitor. They have an active community of users who are willing to share their experiences and how they have extended the solution to do unusual things.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Shankar HN - PeerSpot reviewer
IT strategist at Convergent Wireless Communications
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
You can create a template for a device, then apply it to hundreds of similar devices
Pros and Cons
  • "PRTG is simple to manage. First, you can create a template for a device, then apply it to hundreds of similar devices. That's a great advantage."
  • "There's always room for improvement. The high availability feature is good, but it's an area that PRTG could marginally improve. For example, in PRTG, both servers have a different IP, but it would make things a lot easier if they were bound by a single IP."

What is our primary use case?

It's a globally distributed network. We have multiple data centers or IT setups, and PRTG is deployed at the local data centers. Some of the applications are in the cloud, and PRTG can also monitor those.

What is most valuable?

PRTG is simple to manage. First, you can create a template for a device, then apply it to hundreds of similar devices. That's a great advantage. Secondly, I can use the 80-20 functional rule for any devices I need to monitor. 

For infrastructure monitoring, 80 percent of parameters are monitored every minute or so. I can define all of them at the highest level, and those definitions are inherited at the lowest level. Then you need to customize the setup for the remaining 20 percent. You can deploy them in various groups and do a group-level setup, which will again percolate down to devices. 

The third thing is the concept of tags. PRTG assigns tags to devices and also the parameters you monitor. For example, if you choose to deploy a bandwidth sensor, PRTG automatically tags it with that parameter while giving you the freedom to apply your own tag. 

Let's say my organization has three or even four ISPs. If I'm globally distributed, the ISPs could be different. Now I can monitor all the bandwidth across ISPs based on the tag, or I can see the bandwidth of each ISP individually. I know my uptime and recovery in case of failure. I can also group by choosing a specific ISP tag and getting a report. I now know which of my ISPs is a better performer, which helps me improve the service and decide who to go with.

PRTG is constantly evolving. You have between eight to 12 releases every year, including enhancements to functionality and performance as well as security and bug fixes, so it stays current with our business requirements. It's a well-rounded product.

What needs improvement?

There's always room for improvement. The high availability feature is good, but it's an area that PRTG could marginally improve. For example, in PRTG, both servers have a different IP, but it would make things a lot easier if they were bound by a single IP.  I'm not necessarily trying to say PRTG should imitate other products. 

I'm saying it should be like a typical HA solution should be. It is a fail-safe feature, and the HA component should act like one. In PRTG, it is in an active-active mode, not active-passive. Now, the customers don't need to know the mechanism behind the high availability. They just need to know how many servers are required for deployment. If there is a cluster with a single IP address, it's much easier from the customer's point of view. 

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been working on various versions of PRTG since 2003. While we are using PRTG, we are also looking at various alternatives, but we haven't seen a reason to switch so far.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

PRTG itself is a highly reliable product because of large installed base.

How was the initial setup?

Overall, PRTG is easy to install and understand. We provide frontline support for our customers, but our more competent customers don't come back to us for any support at all. If they don't have the skills, they can install and do the basic deployment, but they require hand-holding and coaching for some things. Still, I think it's a straightforward product. Once a user gets started with the product, they don't need hand-holding for basic functions.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The price of PRTG is reasonable. PRTG's competitors like SolarWinds and ManageEngine charge more for the same functionality. They are much more expensive at licensing level. What's more, PRTG comes as one bundle. For example, the database is part of the PRTG release, so Paessler takes total responsibility for all components they deliver. With other products, you need a separate database engine and databases, and these NMS companies don't take responsibility. When they put out new releases, what if it doesn't work with the previous release of a database? Things become a little tricky. You have to deal with two or more entities for NMS but only one with PRTG.

What other advice do I have?

I rate PRTG Network Monitor 9.5 out of 10. If you're planning to implement PRTG, my advice is to first create a master plan. Set a goal for monitoring. Decide what you want to monitor and why. You need to get ready by organizing network management at the technical and policy level. If you start with a clear understanding of your goals and your environment, PRTG will be a cakewalk.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:
GauravSingh4 - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Parker Digital
Real User
Great integrations, power flow, and good support
Pros and Cons
  • "The power flow is great."
  • "They need a little more self-service."

What is our primary use case?

We started off with infrastructure monitoring, then, over a period of time, we added on the application monitoring and cloud monitoring as well. It's been an incremental thing for us.

What is most valuable?

I like the collectors and I like the agent-less collector's functionality a lot. To me, that's been the top ones. I also like their integrations with the various types of devices that they've built out over a period of time. The power flow is great.

What needs improvement?

They need a little more self-service. Some of the places where there's still a dependency on defense logic. If those could be eliminated, that would be ideal.

They've done a fantastic job eliminating a lot of those dependencies and there's a lot of self-service. However, some of the areas where we could have it connect to, for example, Splunk or ServiceNow, in a self-care version versus having to go back to their engineers, that's an area where they could do a little more.

There are still a lot of engineers who get involved versus if it's a little more API-driven and self-served dashboard connections. Doing it the other way would just make life easier for users.

For how long have I used the solution?

I’ve been using the solution for six years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I don't have any stability concerns. At least I haven't seen any issues on our side. The performance is good. It’s reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn’t crash or freeze.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable. It’s great for enterprise-level organizations.

We have 30 to 35 engineers on the solution right now.

How are customer service and support?

We do deal with technical support. For example, if there's a new upgrade, that's hard to keep up with or there's a new connector that we don't know about then we'll reach out to them.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We have experienced a few different solutions. We’ve used IBM products in the past, and we've used Solarwinds as well. I do prefer the agent-less option, and I also like the roadmap, especially everything ScienceLogic had on the IOPS for five years.

How was the initial setup?

On a scale of one to ten, I’d give it six in terms of ease of setup. We don't need to have some level of engineering expertise. It's not as straightforward as rolling out a Power BI or a Tableau, for example. Also, the infrastructure is multilayered, and it is complex. The rollout should have some level of engineers involved.

For us, the deployment took about two weeks.

What was our ROI?

We have seen an ROI.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The solution is license-based. It's between $8 and $15, depending on what you need from the product.

What other advice do I have?

We are a customer and a partner.

We are currently operating multiple versions of the product.

It may not be the right product if you want to solve a certain use case. You have to have the right use case. It's an excellent product if you have a broader strategy, either as an MSP or as an enterprise. If you just need to replace product “A” with ScienceLogic to monitor 100 endpoints, it's not the perfect use case for them. The perfect use case is how you get it to cover across multiple layers of network, applications, and cloud, especially towards hybrid monitoring. Potential users need more roadmap-based approaches versus a one-point use case.

I’d rate the solution a nine out of ten. My experience with other products and the support I received from ScienceLogic across multiple levels, from engineering to product, especially at the leadership level, has been good. The support and everything they do to help you and your customers are successful. Overall, I really like the product, and I recommend it.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: customer/partner
Flag as inappropriate
Buyer's Guide
Network Monitoring Software
September 2022
Get our free report covering Zabbix, ManageEngine, Paessler AG, and other competitors of SolarWinds NPM. Updated: September 2022.
634,775 professionals have used our research since 2012.