We performed a comparison between Grafana and Alluvio Aternity based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Grafana is preferred over Alluvio Aternity due to its open-source nature, flexibility in integration with other tools, and ability to cater to multiple use cases. It offers a more user-friendly experience with customizable and visually appealing graphs, live monitoring, alerts, and heat maps. Alluvio Aternity could benefit from more customizable reporting options and a better licensing model.
"DEM-Q (Digital Experience Management Quadrant) is very useful. This is where they stand out with their dashboard, because it gives us a picture of how our company is doing compared to the other businesses out there."
"The dashboards of this platform are the most valuable, especially the Desktop Health dashboard."
"The item we use the most and what upper management wants is the SLA reports. It's a good summary of how the applications are performing over time from month to month."
"The infrastructure data, especially the CPU and memory data, is per second, which makes it outstanding as compared to other solutions. Its licensing cost is very low for us."
"The dashboard is very effective."
"The detailed level of information you are able to get on the complete environment all of the way down to a specific machine."
"The user experience it provides is the most valuable feature for us."
"All of it, but it depends on who the end user is. The folks that support the applications, like the signatures that we've developed, it gives them feedback on their application performance."
"Kubernetes could help us to better visualize the trend of our data by recording and displaying our history over a chosen duration, such as the last 30 days."
"Great capacity planning and the solution has a great GUI."
"The solution has good features."
"We like the alert features."
"The integration between Loki and Tempo is valuable."
"The product's initial setup phase was very easy."
"The comparison feature is very good."
"Almost any kind of visualization is possible with Grafana and all dashboards are configurable."
"Potentially, the one thing that could probably help with better levels of enterprise adoption is around creating the application monitoring signatures. That process can be a little bit difficult. If one thing could be simplified a little bit, it would be the application monitoring signature creation process."
"Signature development process requires deep technical expertise in the application and in the use of their studio tools that help you create it."
"For me, the biggest problem is the price. It is not so much about how much it costs. It is about Aternity only giving you 12 months upfront. So, you got to purchase it for 12 months. A lot of our customers are on a per-user-per-month type billing. They are all OPEX rather than CAPEX. It would be a lot better for our customers if there was an option available for OPEX so that it is billed on a monthly basis than a yearly basis. They've got only Windows agents. They don't actually have mobile agents. It would be a lot better if they could also integrate Android and iOS because then we can start pulling steps and performance management out of users' mobile devices. That's the biggest addition I would suggest at the moment. A lot of our customers have desktops as well as tablets or mobile devices. We should be able to monitor that stuff as well."
"The only thing I can say which has been frustrating are the Tableau workspace/dashboard options out-of-the-box, at least prior to version 8."
"Being able to add custom monitoring to dashboards would be nice. Right now, if you want to monitor the value of a registry key on your systems, to get that added into the dashboard you have to reach out to Aternity so they can start looking for that value. It would be interesting if that were more of a self-serve function."
"Their technical support should be improved in terms of response time. Its stability should also be better. We are currently using version 10, and its stability is not so high. The server crashes from time to time and needs to be restarted. Sometimes, you also have problems with applications."
"Its user interface and features should be improved. They don't support new versions of certain Linux editions. That is one of the reasons why we have to move to another solution."
"I would improve the dashboard, the presentation player."
"Its interface could be more accessible."
"The security needs to be improved, such as the capacity to add permissions on dashboards."
"The product's configuration for saving files could be improved."
"I have a problem with Grafana in the area of documentation."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"It would be helpful if Grafana provided more information and training on how to use Prometheus."
"Lacks event management which affects our DevOps people."
"There is a need for improvement in automating daily monitoring reports, especially when alerts are triggered due to system downtimes or fluctuations."
Alluvio Aternity is ranked 21st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 37 reviews while Grafana is ranked 6th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 39 reviews. Alluvio Aternity is rated 8.4, while Grafana is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Alluvio Aternity writes "Not only helped us know which devices to refresh, but helped us determine if a refresh was even necessary, with factual data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Grafana writes "Agent-free with great dashboards and an active community". Alluvio Aternity is most compared with Dynatrace, Nexthink, SysTrack, AppDynamics and Azure Monitor, whereas Grafana is most compared with New Relic, Sentry, Azure Monitor, Elastic Observability and Dynatrace. See our Alluvio Aternity vs. Grafana report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.