We compared Datadog and Pandora FMS across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Datadog users like its customizable displays, error tracking, and advanced AI/ML capabilities. Pandora FMS is highly regarded for its straightforward management process, effective dashboards, and efficient network monitoring capabilities.
Room for Improvement: Datadog could enhance its usability and reduce its learning curve. Users said integration was another pain point. Users say Pandora FMS could make its dashboards more customizable and improve its integration with other systems. Many also said they would like Pandora to add APIs for integration and offer better out-of-the-box analytics.
Service and Support: While many users spoke highly of Datadog’s support team, others reported slow support responses, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. Pandora FMS support received high praise for their expertise, kindness, and fast response time.
Ease of Deployment: Datadog’s setup is considered straightforward, and users often receive help from a partner or vendor. Most users found Pandora FMS’s initial setup to be relatively easy.
Pricing: Opinions about Datadog's price are divided. Some users found it costly, but others thought it was acceptable. Some said the pricing model could be clearer and better explained. Pandora FMS is considered reasonably priced, and the total cost depends on the environment.
ROI: Users said Datadog saved them time and improved visibility into security blind spots. Pandora FMS has also demonstrated advantages in terms of return on investment.
Comparison Results: Datadog is praised for its customizability, easy setup, and robust AI features, but some users say it has room for improvement in areas like usability and integration. Datadog’s pricing and customer service received mixed reviews. Users like Pandora FMS’s management and monitoring capabilities as well as its dashboards, but the solution has been criticized for its compatibility issues, limited customization options, and slower performance.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We integrate our application logs. It is great to be able to tie our metrics and our traces together."
"The full stack of integrations made it easier to monitor the different technologies and platform providers, including Software as a Service providers, that otherwise would need a lot of work and customization to be able to see what is happening."
"It has empowered all our platform engineers with a very powerful and easy to use monitoring system."
"The most valuable feature is the dashboards that are provided out of the box, as well as ones we were able to configure."
"By moving to Datadog, we did not need to manage our own monitoring infrastructure anymore."
"This is definitely a good product and I would consider them one of the leaders within the application monitoring and cloud monitoring space."
"We've found it most useful for managing Rstudio Workbench, which has its own logs that would not be picked up via Cloudwatch."
"Datadog is constantly adding new features."
"The monitoring system within this solution is very good. It is easy to use and navigate, and makes issue alarms easily viewable."
"I like this solution a lot because it has a very large Hispanic community and the platform looks very friendly."
"Thanks to its flexibility, I have been able to adapt the tool to our servers and find out quickly how their console works."
"The network monitoring and configuration within this solution is very good."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"Pandora's architecture is interesting. It's open so you can easily extend and enhance it. It's simpler to customize Pandora compared to other solutions. It's also scalable enough to support large environments."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We'd like Datadog to make the log storage cheaper."
"Managing dashboards as IaC is a bit hard to work out at times."
"I think better access to their engineers when we have a problem could be better."
"They could have better log reporting."
"The correlation between the logs and the metrics needs improvement as most cases, we might use another logging tool (that is cheaper in cost) which we then have to link together."
"The ability to find what you are looking for when starting out could be improved."
"There is occasional UI slowness and bugs."
"Datadog needs more local Asia-Pacific support, and if they don't have a SaaS solution in Asia-Pacific, they should offer an on-prem version. I'm told that's not possible."
"It would be useful if Pandora FMS included an ISO image (or «software appliance») for each big company that leases virtual private machines (VPS), just like in AWS."
"Their support is good, but it is just online communication. It would be great to be able to just call someone and talk to them instead of always writing. It works well for me because I am a decent communicator in email, but some people might find it difficult to describe in a written fashion and communicate with them that way. There is a learning curve to the interface, but once you get used to it, it is actually very powerful. They have a lot of options, but people struggle with the interface. They've improved it though, and it is getting better. They need to keep improving the learning curve to help buy-in. I'm the guy that manages it, so I'm comfortable with it. They can refine the upgrade agents to be easier. They can also do more refinement in end-user usability because not everyone is strong technically, and people who aren't strong technically might be averse to the product, even though it has come a long way. It has a complete GUI and everything."
"I would like to have a dashboard with all assets displayed, with a quick hover-over status."
"A nice feature in the next release would be an automation module to run workflow actions."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"Third-party integration should be improved for some commonly used products."
"I would like for the solution to be faster and have a better tolerance between parallel servers for Pandora and Pest Control."
"I find that this software is resource heavy, and demands a lot of processing capacity."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Datadog is ranked 2nd in Network Monitoring Software with 137 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 28th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our Datadog vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.