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

IBM Kubecost vs IBM Turbonomic 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

IBM Kubecost
Ranking in Cloud Cost Management
22nd
Average Rating
9.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Turbonomic
Ranking in Cloud Cost Management
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
205
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (3rd), Cloud Management (4th), Virtualization Management Tools (3rd), IT Financial Management (1st), IT Operations Analytics (10th), Cloud Analytics (1st), AIOps (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Cloud Cost Management category, the mindshare of IBM Kubecost is 2.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 5.9%, down from 12.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Cost Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Turbonomic5.9%
IBM Kubecost2.7%
Other91.4%
Cloud Cost Management
 

Featured Reviews

DIRK UYTTERHOEVEN - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Enterprise Architect at DV Consulting
Identifies and eliminates overprovisioning of expensive resources like storage, highly scalable and offers performance
I like the overall product because I can select what monitoring should be enabled and whatnot. In our case, we really focus on performance because it's clear that the price is related to most performance setups. So the more performance, the more expensive. So we look into the performance that the customer needs, and then based upon that feedback from the remote control, we change the parameters. And even the end user will not notice it is not using it, so we just make money without any impact on the end users.
reviewer1446966 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Engineer at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them
The management interface seems to be designed for high-resolution screens. Somebody with a smaller-resolution screen might not like the web interface. I run a 4K monitor on it, so everything fits on the screen. With a lower resolution like 1080, you need to scroll a lot. Everything is in smaller windows. It doesn't seem to be designed for smaller screens. When I change the resolution to 1080, I only see half of what I would on my big 4K monitor. It would be annoying to have to scroll to see the flow chart. They have a flow chart that goes top to bottom like a tree. On a lower resolution, it might be nice if that scrolls horizontally because it's long, narrow, and tall. It's only three icons wide, but it's 15 icons tall. I think it would be helpful to have the ability to change that for a smaller screen and customize the widget.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The price is reasonable, considering the value it delivers."
"I mostly like the dashboards."
"It offers a detailed examination of your cluster, including the types of instances utilized, allocated CPU and RAM, and resource distribution for specific applications."
"Automation of leveling out compute power across servers and forecasting."
"The product paid for itself within 30 days."
"Customer Service is excellent; I have yet to open a ticket and not have my problem looked at right away, and 99% of the time, the issues were resolved right away."
"Getting a better understanding on host utilization, providing better planning on infrastructure upgrades."
"We implemented directly with Turbonomic and it was one of the easiest implementation we have had."
"You could take the number of hours per tech that no longer has to administer and babysit machines and resources, add the money saved by maximizing the hardware you have to its fullest potential, then add the labor saved in forecasting and the product pays for itself in the first year easily!"
"With Turbonomic Operations Manager we automated all virtualization infrastructure (Hyper-V, vSphere, XenServer) with one unique management console and we save our CAPEX working with a plan inside of Operations Manager when we change hardware by lifecycle or when we have new projects with capacity planning."
"Turbonomic stepped in and helped manage all the things that we needed to do to increase responsiveness and lower costs."
 

Cons

"There is a significant potential for enhancing it through the incorporation of advanced technologies like AI and generative AI."
"Faster monitoring could potentially improve overall stability in the production environment."
"The integration with other solutions could be improved."
"It would be nice if it was easier to remove a host from that we would not want to manage (licenses)."
"Due to the planner feature's breadth of scenarios it can be a little confusing to get the right result for the scenario you need."
"Wish the storage move accounts for possible VMware snapshots that existed on some host."
"It can be more agnostic in terms of the solutions that it provides. It can include some other cost-saving methods for the public cloud and SaaS applications as well."
"Firstly the documentation and help files are not overly intuitive, providing very few examples or details on how to gain the most out of the product."
"We did have an issue certain build causing the database to fill up however technical support was very helpful in getting updated to a newer version to correct this issue."
"I would like to see the UI become a little more clean but have no suggestion on how to make it better."
"There is room for improvement with upgrades. We have deployed the newer version, version 8 of Turbonomic. The problem is that there is no way to upgrade between major Turbonomic versions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost is cheap. Kubecost has an open-source core."
"The cost of the tool may seem nominal compared to the potential savings in infrastructure expenses."
"The real savings come from using Kubecost features like autoscaling and serverless functions to optimize your resource usage. If you treat it like a data center migration without fine-tuning, it might cost more."
"In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."
"Everybody tells me the pricing is high. But the ROIs are great."
"If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
"Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."
"I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one server. It's not cost-effective if we have to pay more for those. When I move around a VM SQL box with 30 cores and a half-terabyte of RAM, I'm not paying for an entire socket and cores where people assume you have at least 10 or 20 VMs on that socket for that pricing."
"It is an endpoint type license, which is fine. It is not overly expensive."
"It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."
"We see ROI in extended support agreements (ESA) for old software. Migration activities seem to be where Turbonomic has really benefited us the most. It's one click and done. We have new machines ready to go with Turbonomic, which are properly sized instead of somebody sitting there with a spreadsheet and guessing. So, my return on investment would certainly be on currency, from a software and hardware perspective."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Cost Management solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Insurance Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise57
Large Enterprise147
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?
It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is set as a percentage of the consumption of some of our customers' services. The ...
What needs improvement with Turbonomic?
The implementation could be enhanced.
What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?
We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting. This helps us get a consolidated view of all customer spending into a single d...
 

Also Known As

Kubecost - Amazon EKS cost monitoring
Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Kubecost vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.