We performed a comparison between Loom Systems and Moogsoft based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"The product currently seems to be a few steps ahead of the competition."
"Moogsoft is easily deployable and ready to use."
"I like the prediction features."
"Moogsoft's most valuable features are event management, correlation, and observability."
"The AI component allows you to check previous cases and diagnose problems easily."
"The solution is extremely helpful with correlating IP failures and it has a very good sort of flow chart of IP systems. For example, if you see a failure in system A, you can track it down to the system causing the issue. This is a very handy feature."
"Moogsoft AIOps integrates seamlessly with 50-plus IT monitoring, automation, service management, notification, and collaboration tools. It also provides a great and easy-to-use interface for observing."
"The Event Management feature is quite valuable."
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"I would like to see more integrations. It is rather difficult to install the enterprise systems with the agents."
"They are very much dependent on open-source technologies like RabbitMQ message bus. They are using open-source databases, Apache Tomcat, NGINX. If we face any issues with Apache Tomcat or the RabbitMQ message bus, then we do not get support from them. We have to troubleshoot it ourselves."
"I would like to see how Moogsoft integrates with the multi-cloud and brings out a single pane of glass, to see everything on one screen."
"Moogsoft is dependent on external products to do orchestration and SOP-based functionality."
"I would like to see additional reports or information on the dashboard that includes metrics about CPU usage and memory."
"It is taking a long time to set it up and could do more to roll out quickly."
"The documentation and flexibility for generic integration could be improved."
"They should consider including Chatbot."
Loom Systems is ranked 57th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 4 reviews while Moogsoft is ranked 38th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 11 reviews. Loom Systems is rated 8.0, while Moogsoft is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Loom Systems writes "Simple and very effective for developing and configuring apps with great integration capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Moogsoft writes "A cost-efffective cloud solution for noise filtration but needs enhanced interfaces". Loom Systems is most compared with Elastic Search and Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring, whereas Moogsoft is most compared with ServiceNow IT Operations Management, BigPanda, Dynatrace, Dell CloudIQ and OpsRamp. See our Loom Systems vs. Moogsoft report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.