Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

LiveAction LiveNX vs ScienceLogic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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

LiveAction LiveNX
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
29th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
30th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ScienceLogic
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
25th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
21st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (6th), Unified Communications Monitoring (1st), Server Monitoring (13th), IT Operations Analytics (7th), Cloud Monitoring Software (15th), AIOps (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of LiveAction LiveNX is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScienceLogic is 1.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

Ashwani Bansal - PeerSpot reviewer
Network management and diagnostics improved through effective monitoring and reporting capabilities
The solution is handy. I have not used that particular feature. Maintenance is required for the system. If you want to use something on the endpoints or end-user devices, then using LiveAction LiveNX in place of other tools would be quite beneficial. The solution impacts operational costs and resources. On a scale of 1-10, I rate LiveAction LiveNX a nine.
Michael Wenn - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers comprehensive monitoring and tool consolidation but integration complexity needs improvement
There is room for improvement in the speed of setting up the service and integrating PowerPacks. Although these prebuilt features are great, there is considerable complexity in bringing them together to create a unified dashboard. Even with many good integrations and deep visibility, the implementation takes time, especially when it doesn't involve these integrations. While some other companies have easier APIs, using this solution demands significant expertise. It's challenging for new customers to implement independently. The implementation speed of non-PowerPack or non-out-of-the-box integrations should be improved. Additionally, the AI automation feature is not yet very rich due to resource constraints supporting a wide platform.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We provide a tool for our customers to manage their reports. It's an extremely highly featured platform capable of producing a lot of data. We spent quite a long time working with customers and LiveAction to create template reports, and they're very good and configurable. You get a lot of data if you don't configure them."
"Its analytical capability is really good."
"All in all, LiveAction LiveNX has become an indispensable tool for maintaining and improving our network's reliability and performance, ultimately supporting our organization's goal of providing timely and dependable delivery services."
"On a scale of 1-10, I rate LiveAction LiveNX a nine."
"We don't have any complaints about the software. According to my team, it's a very good tool that's very intuitive."
"One of the valuable features is the ability to create CLI scripts on the fly to fix any issues. We were using it for QoS modeling to ensure that we were properly modeling QoS, and it basically said here is what you need to fix to get this QoS done, whether it is ACL or something else. It would either push or recommend. If you have the right credentials, you could also push. It is very good if you are a Cisco shop. It gives you reporting, latency, and bandwidth utilization for your applications, so you can do good capacity management planning. There are a lot of pieces that LiveNX can give you. It is a total NPM solution for SD-WAN."
"LiveAction LiveNX provides valuable real-time and historical network traffic visualization capabilities that help monitor and analyze network performance."
"The intention and the idea of the filter is great."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"It is simple."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"Since it is a SaaS-based product, the setup is not very difficult."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
 

Cons

"The only downside to this software is the price."
"They need to create a more simplified UI."
"The customer service and technical support of LiveAction LiveNX are rated at 4 out of 10."
"Improved documentation and more responsive customer support can help in addressing issues faster."
"Sometimes the solution does not register devices properly and that is a bug."
"The tool crashes sometimes when we try to pull reports simultaneously."
"This is a horrible solution and I think everything needs to be improved."
"The product is weak in multi-tenancy. We have to install multiple instances of LiveAction, whereas we would like to build it once for our customers."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"Integrating observability and APM monitoring into the overall portfolio would be beneficial."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"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. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"There is room for improvement in the speed of setting up the service and integrating PowerPacks."
"From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot."
"ScienceLogic is working towards a kind of AI, DKAIRA enablement, but I find one dependency is the frequent need to rely on professional services."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the free version."
"The solution is fairly expensive compared to other products."
"It's very expensive."
"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."
"Plan for adding more to it. Once you see EM7 in action, you will want to keep adding systems to monitor."
"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."
"It comes with the OS built in, so no need to purchase an OS license or DB license."
"The solution is license-based. It's between $8 and $15, depending on what you need from the product."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LiveAction LiveNX?
The product has a very good graphical interface.
What needs improvement with LiveAction LiveNX?
In my use cases, I do not see any improvements needed. The solution could potentially integrate with Azure, AWS, and multi-cloud networks.
What is your primary use case for LiveAction LiveNX?
For observability, I use ThousandEyes, LiveSP, and LiveAction LiveNX for service provider networks. I am actually a service provider, and I use it for my SD-WAN clients. I usually use it with my en...
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?
ScienceLogic is working towards a kind of AI, DKAIRA enablement, but I find one dependency is the frequent need to rely on professional services. If the knowledge for implementation could be spread...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

LiveNX
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tampa Electric, Digital First Media, Allscripts, Boxwood Technology
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 LiveAction LiveNX vs. ScienceLogic and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.