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

LogicMonitor vs Zenoss Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 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

LogicMonitor
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
6th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
8th
Ranking in Container Monitoring
4th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
5th
Ranking in AIOps
6th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (9th)
Zenoss Cloud
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
65th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
52nd
Ranking in Container Monitoring
8th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
41st
Ranking in AIOps
28th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (19th), Event Monitoring (14th), Server Monitoring (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the AIOps category, the mindshare of LogicMonitor is 5.5%, up from 4.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zenoss Cloud is 2.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
AIOps Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LogicMonitor5.5%
Zenoss Cloud2.2%
Other92.3%
AIOps
 

Featured Reviews

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.
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

"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by reducing our volume of incidents that we work on."
"LogicMonitor has more features compared to CloudWatch in terms of real-time alerting, log ingestion, alerting, visualization dashboards, and complaint support."
"Whenever we reach out to our customers, we give LogicMonitor as a dashboard to them so they don't need to monitor the hardware side separately. For example, if my service is running on their hardware X, that means they don't need to monitor hardware X and our services too. LogicMonitor has the capability of monitoring their hardware as well as our services. This is how LogicMonitor helps us."
"LogicMonitor helps us prevent potential downtime. It's pretty good. It generates low-level warnings that aren't necessarily preemptive but can still alert us to issues we should investigate. These warnings allow us to correlate data and identify areas where we should take action, even if the issues aren't critical."
"LogicMonitor is good for getting a full view of your topologies. They have LiveMaps, which give you a visual representation of your infrastructure."
"LogicMonitor added AI technology to help understand what's normal and that has helped quite a bit, so that's the feature I found most valuable in the product. The product is also doing quite well with identifying devices and customizing a particular Cisco version or model number. LogicMonitor continues to be active in updating what is available to be monitored, and it's been very good with keeping those things current, so that's another valuable feature of the product."
"As a service provider, I believe the biggest benefit from LogicMonitor for my clients is that it provides full-stack infrastructure observability."
"The alerting would be number one in my book. The thresholds for getting alerts for different criteria are pretty well-thought-out. We don't get many false positives or negatives on the alerting side. If we do get an email alert or some similar alert, we know that it is something that has to be looked at."
"Zenoss is more complex than LogicMonitor, but scalable and hugely customizable."
"Its Docker Container concept is mind blowing. It is the first monitoring tool which comes with Docker features."
"Overall, it's a great solution, and I consider it to be one of the best."
"With this solution, they can have one million users at the same time with no crashes."
"What I like most about Zenoss Service Dynamics is that it monitors the devices and gives close to real-time alerts. For example, in case the device is not available, Zenoss Service Dynamics generates an alert so my team can resolve the issue."
"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 very cost-effective compared to the tools I worked with in the past."
 

Cons

"One thing that could be really better is the mapping. Auvik is really good at it."
"Sometimes alerts do not include enough immediate context, so I still have to spend a few minutes correlating data across views."
"I'd like to see more automation in the tool, especially around remediation."
"Automated remediation of issues has room for improvement. I don't know how best to handle it, but I know that they're kind of working on it. I know there are some resources that can do automated remediation. I would like them to improve this area so it could be completely hands-free, where it detects an issue, such as, if a CPU is running high. There are ways to do it even now, but it's a bit more involved."
"We would like to see more functionality around mapping of topologies, in terms of networks. An improvement that we would like to see is added functionality to get more detail out of mapping. For example, if the LogicMonitor Collector identifies a connection between two network endpoints, it would be great to actually see which ports are connecting the two endpoints together. That functionality is something we greatly desire. It would actually make our documentation more dynamic in the sense that we wouldn't need to manually document. If this is something that the platform could provide, then this would be a great asset."
"The dashboards can be improved. They are good, but there is a pain point. To show things to management, to explain pain points to other customers, to show them exactly where we can do better, the dashboarding could be better. Dashboards need to show the key things. Nobody is going to go into the ample details of Excel sheets or HTML."
"Role-based permissions could be better and updating modules could be smoother."
"I think the product is expensive when looking at products in the same segment in the market."
"This solution is complex for beginners so it takes some time to learn."
"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."
"The AI aspect needs to improve."
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
"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"
"The inclusion of a feature to show a graphical view of the network would be a helpful improvement."
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is pretty expensive, but we now need one less full-time engineer. With on-prem, we used to have one more engineer in our department. That engineer has now moved to another department. Our capacity is better with this product than the previous one. It is easy for us to manage the sites. You have to choose between the standard account and the premium account. With the premium account, you get a lot more than the standard one, and you can also buy some extra features. It is a good thing to look at them because you would probably want to buy them. You should take your time and negotiate the price. They are easy. Like all cloud providers, they are able to discuss the price and if necessary, change the price."
"We have definitely seen ROI with LogicMonitor. We used to provide 24/7 IT support for our users. We have since been able to change to operating just within normal business hours for IT support, and LogicMonitor was a large part of being able to accomplish that."
"They are expensive for the cloud."
"The features were very valuable to us because we could consolidate them into one platform and have a good user experience with the platform, our accounts, and the support team. That was the key driver for us. That was what we were looking for. We looked for a comprehensive solution that could provide advanced features all in one platform, and LogicMonitor was the solution that we chose. It definitely has a premium price. However, you are getting what you pay for in a very effective way. That was important in our decision-making.The features were very valuable to us because we could consolidate them into one platform and have a good user experience with the platform, our accounts, and the support team. That was the key driver for us. That was what we were looking for. We looked for a comprehensive solution that could provide advanced features all in one platform, and LogicMonitor was the solution that we chose. It definitely has a premium price. However, you are getting what you pay for in a very effective way. That was important in our decision-making."
"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."
"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."
"LogicMonitor is competitively priced at the same level as other vendors, like Datadog."
"We are on an enterprise license plan, we are paying $7.75 per device a month. That is for a commitment of 350 devices. Anything that is over the 350 is charged at 1.2 times the rate; 1.2 times $7.75 would be the overage charge. We are looking at increasing our commitment to either 450 or 500 devices. It changes our pricing if we go to 450 devices, bringing it from $7.75 down to $7.70. If we go for 500 devices, it brings it from $7.75 down to $7.50. We will probably factor in the volume discount drop from $7.75 to $7.50 in our decision of whether we uplift or not. We also have some cloud monitors, which are about $500 a month."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which AIOps solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Construction Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Transportation Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

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?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the licensing model has changed and is very confusing as it currently stands and overly complicated.
What needs improvement with LogicMonitor?
I do see negatives and areas for improvement in LogicMonitor. Obviously, there is always space for improvement. First of all, I believe the commercial aspects require improvement. At the moment, if...
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...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Cloud Monitoring, Zenoss Service Dynamics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Kayak, Zendesk, Ted Baker, Trulia, Sophos, iVision, TekLinks, Siemens
2degrees, Rackspace, State of North Dakota, El Paso Independent School District, NWN Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about LogicMonitor vs. Zenoss Cloud and other solutions. Updated: July 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.