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

LiveNX vs LogicMonitor comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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

LiveNX
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
35th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
38th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
LogicMonitor
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
6th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (10th), Container Monitoring (4th), Cloud Monitoring Software (6th), AIOps (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of LiveNX is 0.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.8%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LogicMonitor2.8%
LiveNX0.9%
Other96.3%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1247523 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Sales Services Department at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees
Collaboration and network optimization become more effective with detailed feedback
The customers use LiveAction LiveNX for network monitoring and management purposes LiveAction LiveNX provides valuable real-time and historical network traffic visualization capabilities that help monitor and analyze network performance. The solution could be enhanced by implementing custom…
Anshuman Thakur - PeerSpot reviewer
Site Reliability Engineer at a comms service provider with 501-1,000 employees
Monitoring has reduced downtime and now enables proactive alerts across cloud workloads
When it comes to the improvement of LogicMonitor, I think there are a few points that can be improved. The first one is alert tuning, which takes time. It requires effort when trying to understand it for the first time. The defaults do not always match our workload patterns, so I have to adjust the thresholds to reduce noise and avoid alert fatigue. While the dashboards are solid, I sometimes wish that the UI was a bit more intuitive when drilling down quickly during an incident. There are many options and finding the exact view where I can identify the exact problem takes a few extra clicks. When an alert comes and I click on a LogicMonitor alert, it takes time to understand what the alert actually is and to go through the data points. The alert page specifically could be better. The alert tuning part can also be made more simple. The first area that could be better is alert clarity and routing. Sometimes alerts do not include enough immediate context, so I still have to spend a few minutes correlating data across views. Adding more actionable details directly in the alert would make the response even faster. LogicMonitor sometimes gives false alerts as well. For example, if an EC2 instance is down, it will not determine whether the EC2 instance has been deliberately turned off or if it is actually not responding. At that time, it will give false alerts. The clearing of alerts is also an issue. Once an issue is fixed, the alert should be cleared, but it takes a little time for that alert to be cleared. Another improvement that would be helpful is simpler customization for complex dashboards. It is powerful, but building highly tailored dashboards, especially across multiple environments, can feel heavy and time-consuming. I would also appreciate a stronger out-of-the-box AWS correlation, such as automatically grouping related issues across EC2, EBS, and ALBs in a way that reads as a single incident story. This would reduce the mental overhead during outages. Grouping incidents together, such as all the EC2 alerts, all the EBS alerts, or all the load balancer alerts would be beneficial. Overall, none of these are blockers, just some improving areas. There could be smarter anomaly detection out of the box that can catch unusual but important behavior without manual tuning of every threshold. Better tagging and dynamic grouping for EC2 instances would also be helpful. Cleaner alert de-duplication so a single underlying issue does not generate multiple redundant alerts would improve the system. More guided root cause workflows would be beneficial, such as providing the most likely causes based on correlated metrics. Faster search navigation across devices, dashboards, and alerts during incidents would also improve the platform.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"On a scale of 1-10, I rate LiveAction LiveNX a nine."
"Its analytical capability is really good."
"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."
"The alerting feature is very good because it allows you to set MOS alerts at various network junctures or data points."
"The product has a very good graphical interface."
"We don't have any complaints about the software. According to my team, it's a very good tool that's very intuitive."
"If you're looking for a tool that will solve your problems in a short period of time more effectively, LiveNX is the right tool."
"There are many positive attributes, and it's the best of the best."
"We have definitely seen ROI with LogicMonitor."
"One of the key reasons for going for it was the knowledge of the things that they put in the product."
"What I appreciate about LogicMonitor is that it has a number of data sources and data points, which they call LogicModules."
"LogicMonitor has evolved drastically in the last couple of years; they have made a lot of changes and are moving very fast."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by especially improving service reliability and user experience, and the dynamic alerting and root cause analysis have helped us fix issues before they cause a full-blown outage or degrade performance for end users."
"LogicMonitor helps improve outcomes, including improved infrastructure uptime, faster issue resolution, and better visibility across servers, network devices, and cloud resources."
"It's the depth of data that it gathers that I find really useful because there's nothing worse, when you're trying to find information about something or dig deeper into something, than hitting the bottom of the information really quickly and not having enough information to work with. With LogicMonitor, there is a load of information to dig through. It's a really good solution for that."
"It has improved our organization with its capacity planning. We have a performance environment that we use to benchmark our applications. We use it to say, "Okay, at a certain level of concurrency, we know where our application will fall over." Therefore, we are using LogicMonitor dashboards to tell us that we're good. Our platform can handle X number of clients concurrently hitting us at a time."
 

Cons

"My advice to others would be to run away from it. This is a slight exaggeration but this is more because the application is horrible, the stability is horrible, the performance is horrible and the support is horrible."
"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."
"This is a horrible solution and I think everything needs to be improved."
"They have some unique functionality but they need to create a more simplified UI."
"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 only downside to this software is the price; it's a very pricey solution and very expensive, and it requires a good amount of resources in terms of server memory."
"Sometimes the solution does not register devices properly and that is a bug."
"There is a lack of automation, especially in terms of remediating problems. The problem is seen and identified, but there is a need and a gap where LogicMonitor can help us automate the remediation of the problem."
"One thing that could be really better is the mapping. Auvik is really good at it."
"It needs better access for customizing and adding monitoring from the repository. That would be helpful. It seems like you have to search through the forums to figure out what specific pieces you need to get in for specific monitoring, if it's a nonstandard piece of equipment or process. You have to hunt and find certain elements to get them in place. If they could make it a bit easier rather having to find the right six-digit code to put in so it implements, that would be helpful."
"Their Logs feature is quite new. It is not as feature-rich as we would like it to be."
"We only use plain monitoring and do not use cloud monitoring such as Office 365 because it is too expensive."
"The topology mapping is all based on the dynamic discovery of devices that could talk to each other. There is no real manual way that you can set up a join between two devices to say, "This is how this network is actually set up." For example, if you have a device, and you're only pinning that device and not getting any real intelligent information from it, then it can't appear on the map with other devices. Or if it can appear, then it won't show you which devices are actually joined to it."
"One thing Dynatrace had that I enjoyed was real-time support chat available to reach someone and get help in real-time. With LogicMonitor, that is not really an option."
"The main challenge occurs when LogicMonitor goes down while the physical device is actually up."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the free version."
"It's very expensive."
"The solution is fairly expensive compared to other products."
"The tool's pricing falls into the middle range."
"We've had customers who have reduced their costs by not having multiple platforms for monitoring. That said, especially with super-large environments, the cost model for LogicMonitor is the one area where we run into issues."
"It can handle scaling. It is like any other cloud service. There is a cost associated with scaling, so we currently don't monitor all of our environments. We monitor just the customer-facing production environments. It would be nice if we could monitor our dominant environments, but we will have to pay a lot more due to the scaling issue. So, there's a balance there between what we would like and what we are willing to pay for."
"It definitely pays for itself in the amount of time we're not spending with false errors or things that we haven't quite dealt with monitoring. It has been good cost-wise."
"LogicMonitor is competitively priced at the same level as other vendors, like Datadog."
"As a managed service provider, we have the highest level of licensing that they offer, so we don't have any extra fees. I believe there are some add-ons for some of the lower tiers of LogicMonitor service, but that's not something that we use with our agreement."
"I know we are saving at least several hundred thousand dollars in that we're not buying Cisco Prime."
"It's affordable. The price we get per license is a lot cheaper than what we were getting with some of the other tools. There are other monitoring tools out there that are cheaper, but what you get with LogicMonitor, out-of-the-box, makes it worth the cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with LiveAction LiveNX?
The solution could be enhanced by implementing custom patterns for each customer.
What is your primary use case for LiveAction LiveNX?
The customers use LiveAction LiveNX for network monitoring and management purposes.
What advice do you have for others considering LiveAction LiveNX?
I work as an integrator with LiveAction LiveNX. Most customers prefer deploying it on premises rather than in the cloud. The advanced diagnostics capabilities, including flow-based surveillance and...
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
It actually depends on the exact purpose or requirements. Some tools are better for only network devices while others are better from a cloud monitoring or APM monitoring perspective. You can check...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogicMonitor?
I do not manage the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for LogicMonitor.
What needs improvement with LogicMonitor?
LogicMonitor tends to continuously ping the servers and the environment, which can create a lot of false alerts. Another thing is that it is not very good for application monitoring.LogicMonitor ca...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

LiveNX
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tampa Electric, Digital First Media, Allscripts, Boxwood Technology
Kayak, Zendesk, Ted Baker, Trulia, Sophos, iVision, TekLinks, Siemens
Find out what your peers are saying about LiveNX vs. LogicMonitor and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.