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

Kaseya Traverse vs Zenoss Cloud comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Kaseya Traverse
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
75th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
53rd
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Zenoss Cloud
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
63rd
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
42nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (19th), Event Monitoring (14th), Server Monitoring (25th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (52nd), Container Monitoring (9th), AIOps (28th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Kaseya Traverse is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zenoss Cloud is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Zenoss Cloud0.9%
Kaseya Traverse0.6%
Other98.5%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

AMMAR HUMAIDY HUSIN - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Consultant at a university with 11-50 employees
Automation increases efficiency, but pricing needs to be more competitive
Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpful for me as a customer. The issue always is the price, as we cannot beat most of our competitors on pricing alone. If a product is just nice to have, not essential like an antivirus, if it's not really competitive with pricing, we cannot sell it.
ClaudiaChen - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Architect - Senior Technology Architect at Telstra
Generates close to real-time alerts so users can resolve issues, but needs more integration and public cloud monitoring features
As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"In terms of most valuable features, we are happy with everything so far, and maybe in a year's time I'll have a different opinion on what can change, what can be better, but for now it's the perfect solution."
"We have found the solution to be very flexible to our requirements. We have been able to configure it on-premise effectively when we were using less of the cloud."
"The remote support and data collection features are great."
"It's a simple and humble tool."
"Automating processes is crucial for me, so the automation part stands out."
"Most of the features are pretty good and the solution is user friendly."
"It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution."
"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."
"The product offers good documentation that helps with initial training."
"The custom built integration is one of the most valuable features because you can see all the especially critical items."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible discovery mechanism."
"It is the most flexible solution of this type, but it takes time to adapt."
"Zenoss is more complex than LogicMonitor, but scalable and hugely customizable."
"It is very cost-effective compared to the tools I worked with in the past."
"They have also accommodated many state-of-the-art technologies like Docker and ZooKeeper."
"With this solution, they can have one million users at the same time with no crashes."
 

Cons

"Reporting is a bit difficult."
"The support for the solution needs some improvement. In my experience, the response time to answer a query is slow."
"However, the issue lies in the adequacy of the responses to my questions, which are usually not up to par."
"Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect."
"With my most recent experiences on the solution, I can say that it isn't currently stable; there are a lot of glitches and bugs and the reliability just isn't there right now."
"Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also."
"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."
"Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us."
"Technical support is 3/10, poor: Incomplete and poor documentation Undocumented processes Inconsistent solutions to problems depending on source"
"As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor."
"There is room for improvement with the administrative part. They introduced Control Center to manage things in Zenoss 5. The services that Zenoss provides remained the same, but the administrative part, since they introduced Docker, etc., has become a little complex"
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"The inclusion of a feature to show a graphical view of the network would be a helpful improvement."
"The AI aspect needs to improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price depends on whether you are monitoring different applications, especially in bulk, and depends on what you're doing. If you're monitoring one endpoint, it will cost you 150 ZAR."
"The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive."
"The pricing depends on the environment, the number of services, and the size of the data center. It can go from $100,000 to a million dollars."
"It depends on the customer, what he wants."
"It is very cost-effective compared to the tools I worked with in the past. The company is gaining a lot with respect to the cost factor. It provides agentless monitoring and in a very cheap way."
"There are additional costs you'll have to pay apart from the license fee for Zenoss Service Dynamics. I can't remember exactly how much my company is paying because I don't handle the finance part, but the cost is paid annually. On a scale of one to five, with one being the cheapest and five being the most expensive, I'm rating the solution three out of five."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
15%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Transportation Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Kaseya Traverse?
Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpfu...
What is your primary use case for Kaseya Traverse?
If I want to automate the management and maintenance of my server automatically, this product is a good use case for that.
What advice do you have for others considering Kaseya Traverse?
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. As Kaseya sellers, we always promote Kaseya first. If the price is more competitive, then I think it will be better. It's a main pain point for us as a resel...
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
In my experience, I worked with many monitoring software, but the one that gave me the most functionalities of a large-scale company is Zenoss, due to its ability to monitor completely hybrid and a...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Cloud Monitoring, Zenoss Service Dynamics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

UltiSat, Clear Concepts, nVidia, United States Postal Service, Cisco, Redbox, Spark Digital, People's Bank & Trust
2degrees, Rackspace, State of North Dakota, El Paso Independent School District, NWN Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaseya Traverse vs. Zenoss Cloud and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.