Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Avada Software Infrared360 vs Sentry comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 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

Avada Software Infrared360
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
77th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (5th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (11th), Server Monitoring (36th)
Sentry
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Debugging (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Avada Software Infrared360 is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sentry is 7.0%, up from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

it_user685326 - PeerSpot reviewer
An offsite team performs a daily infrastructure health check and sends reports to the technical/management teams.
Administration, Monitoring, and Delegation are the most valuable features of the solution. * Administration: It provides a centralized audit trail of all the infrastructure changes. * Monitoring: It gives the ability to integrate with my company's global notification system, and the ability to proactively automate corrective actions. * Delegation: It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams.
Abdullah Baig - PeerSpot reviewer
An easy-to-use solution that has a good dashboard, performs well, and provides flexible pricing
Sentry was easy to learn compared to New Relic and Azure Monitor. I saw some valuable input. It took us the least amount of time to see how Sentry is valuable. It took just a few minutes. Session Replay provides a replay of the recorded errors. It is a good feature. Azure Monitor does not have this feature. The error reporting is straightforward. We can see everything that we need to see. The dashboard seems pretty fine. The product performs well. We can see the user's IP addresses.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."
"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"The stability is very good for Sentry and in general works well."
"Overall, I give Sentry a rating of 10."
"The product performs well."
"Its initial setup process is relatively straightforward."
"Great for capturing application performance metrics and error logs."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"Sentry is more accurate than some other tools such as Datadog because it has more integration with Slack, GitLab, Jira, or other ticketing tools."
"The implementation is easy. After one or two days, I can learn and use it. It's not too hard."
 

Cons

"Some of the graphics in the interface could be improved. It's pretty basic. Some interfaces are not up to what you're used to seeing on other, more Windows-like tools."
"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"The UI can be cumbersome - but we are still using the Viper interface and we have not had the time to check out the Alloy interface which is supposed to be much improved."
"One area where they could improve is with their documentation. Some sections are not up to date with new release information and providing additional samples in some areas would be very helpful."
"We are still working with the FTE/MFT subscription monitoring and reporting functionality. That is an area in which we would like to see further development taking place."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"The log centralization and analysis could be improved in Sentry."
"Lacks user metric tracking and the ability to create more dashboards."
"It should be easier to integrate Sentry with other tools, and the end-to-end tracing capabilities could be improved."
"To deal with its shortcomings, Sentry needs to continuously improve in areas like the user interface and documentation, apart from its other features."
"It would be nice if the product provided a map showing the users’ geographic location."
"The price could be lowered."
"I have not worked with Sentry long enough to provide advice for improvements. I need more experience and time."
"I would like to have alert policies and alert conditions enhanced in the next release."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Avada Software's licensing metric is very good because the license fees are based on the number of connections (which have not increased for us very much over the years) rather than the CPU processing power (which increases significantly whenever our hardware is upgraded) or the number of users (which has increased for us a lot since our original purchase)."
"Start small, then increase licensing later as per your demand."
"Because the licensing is at the QMGR level, you need to have at least a small cushion of licenses for occasional enterprise needs."
"Our internal budget calculation model incorporates the pricing per endpoint for any new projects. However, as our footprint for distributed queue managers shrinks as part of our shared middleware hub deployment, the initial licensing and support costs have been reduced over the last five years."
"We can adjust the price a little bit based on our needs."
"Currently, we are in the production phase of our project and we are on free plans to use Sentry. Once we go live we will have to be on a subscription-based plan."
"I am currently using a self-hosted open version."
"We are currently paying through Cloudera for the Sentry service."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
41%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Hospitality Company
5%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sentry?
The product costs $26 a month if we choose a yearly subscription. Code coverage can be added for an additional $29 per month. The Team plan is the cheapest package available. We can make our own bu...
What needs improvement with Sentry?
I have not worked with Sentry long enough to provide advice for improvements. I need more experience and time.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Infrared360
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

USBank, Southwest Airlines, Visiting Nurse Services of New York, Aon Hewitt, Parker Hannifin,  Cantonal Bank of Zurich (ZKB), Hagemeyer NA, and many others
Dropbox, Airbnb, Stripe, Uber
Find out what your peers are saying about Avada Software Infrared360 vs. Sentry and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.