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

AWS Auto Scaling vs ITRS Geneos 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

AWS Auto Scaling
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
14th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ITRS Geneos
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
33rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (68th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (45th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of AWS Auto Scaling is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ITRS Geneos is 1.1%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
AWS Auto Scaling0.4%
ITRS Geneos1.1%
Other98.5%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Ishaka Michael Efe - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer Intern at HNG Tech
Automation has simplified traffic management and improved workload efficiency
I'm not really sure what improvements I would want to see in AWS Auto Scaling because I haven't really used it extensively or explored most of it. To the extent that I've used it so far, I think it is very good. I can't really say for certain what should be improved because I haven't really explored it a lot. However, what I've been using it for has been very good. If there could be training for AWS Auto Scaling, that would be fine. If you could add more training on how to use it correctly and on the functions that I haven't used before or some people have not really used before, that would help. If there could be more documentation and training on it, that would be beneficial.
Durai CT - PeerSpot reviewer
Head FM Monitoring at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
A stable, scalable, and flexible monitoring tool
Real-time data is one of the unique features that ITRS Geneos offers. For example, if there is an impact on a particular server and a particular application, I want to see what the impact is or what the CPU or hardware usage information is, as well as the service in the same application. I can see the real-time data and the impact by accessing ITRS Geneos and looking at the tree. I don't want a tool that tells me when something is broken. I want the tool to tell me when something is going to break. That is the difference between ITRS Geneos and other tools. I want proactive monitoring, not reactive. I don't need to be notified after the fact that something has broken. If something is broken, I get a notification by email, and some of my customers are going to call me. ITRS Geneos provides proactive monitoring. The great advantage of this tool is real-time monitoring. ITRS Geneos not only alerts us but also gives us a real-time view of the data. This is the tool's first great advantage. It is also lightweight and flexible and can adapt to monitor even low-latency systems, which is the tool's second advantage. Another great feature of this tool is its good presentation layer, which allows us to build custom dashboards to present to business stakeholders. This gives them a high-level status of what is being monitored. If we compare ITRS Geneos to other tools, we will find that each one specializes in a specific area, but the ITRS Geneos tool is more comprehensive. This is its great advantage.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The automation aspect where you can automate it to whatever you want is what I value the most about Auto Scaling."
"The setup is not very complex."
"I would highly recommend Auto Scaling to others because it is a fantastic feature that simplifies scaling processes and makes deployment efficient."
"It efficiently handles traffic, ensuring we are not running expenses and the infrastructure is strong enough to handle the load."
"It is a stable platform."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it scales automatically without manual intervention based on the metrics we provide."
"The solution helps optimize the cost of the AWS environment."
"The tool gives you the flexibility to scale up and grow. The solution is also fast to deploy."
"In my experience, being able to monitor our databases is a valuable feature as we can create our own queries and aren't reliant on the in-built ones."
"The ability to build integrations to tools that are not monitored out of the box is the most valuable feature."
"The Netprobe is so lightweight compared to the agents that most monitoring tools use. It's really superior to the competition. The agent that is used by almost every competitive tool takes a lot more system resources. It's slower and it requires a greater effort and more compromises in terms of security to install on the monitored servers. With Geneos, because it lives outside the code, it is far easier and far less taxing on the monitored systems."
"I always appreciate Geneos's stability and ease of use."
"ITRS uses SNMP to communicate with our devices as well as SNMP net probes installed on our servers."
"It enables us to monitor application processes, to do log-monitoring on a 24/7 basis, to do server-level monitoring - all the hardware parameters - as well as monitor connectivity across applications to the interfaces."
"One of the most valuable features of ITRS Geneos is the active time feature that helps with the trading applications that I support."
"Ability to monitor logs for potential issues to prevent app outages before problems get a chance to arise. That's invaluable for our teams in a fast-paced trading environment."
 

Cons

"The speed of the solution must be improved."
"It could be cheaper."
"Setting up the configuration involves too much work for the cloud engineer."
"The only area of improvement is the speed at which servers are launched. When cleaning up to six servers at a time, it can take up to 15 to 20 minutes to launch new servers."
"The setup can be a bit complex in some situations."
"The solution's infrastructure scalability and elasticity could be improved."
"The solution must improve automation."
"The product could add more features for managing instances."
"There is one drawback to using lightweight data collection: we lack the feature of observability based on time series, such as historical model data. This makes it difficult to view data in ITRS. ITRS needs to improve this feature."
"I would like ITRS Geneos to develop an app, where instead of going to specific login terminals or logging into laptops or desktops to check alerts, we can have visibility in the app itself."
"A lightweight version which could host more than 100 gateways, as we can see slowness while loading all our gateways."
"We all look at the same things - CPU, disk space, paging stats, service status with RAG status on each. That could be provided straight out, saving significant time."
"I would like to see ITRS integrate its setup editor with a SVN to check-in setup XML after major changes."
"I would really like to see something from the Geneos side to set up automated reporting from ITRS. We have to send reporting to management every day. To do that we have to check the dashboard and then we have to report whether everything is fine or not. In the future, I want something, some reporting kind of feature in ITRS, where it can collect all the data and mention what is green, what is amber, what is red in a report."
"At the moment Geneos is excellent and handling real time monitoring, however not great at doing historical reporting."
"The ITA, the post-incident analytics, could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AWS Auto Scaling is a pay-per-use and pay-as-you-use service."
"The product has moderate pricing."
"The product is expensive."
"AWS Auto Scaling's price is high."
"The pricing is good. I have not had any customers that have complained about the price."
"AWS Auto Scaling is an expensive solution."
"AWS Auto Scaling is a cheap solution."
"The pricing seems reasonable. We're happy enough with it."
"The organization is not just purchasing a license for the product, but also managing services and professional services from ITRS. Another factor is if the implementation is going to be in production, non-production, or both."
"The product is priced quite high. There are pricing options for customers based on the size of the environment and plug-ins used by the monitoring system."
"The pricing is fairly market-related. They have been very lenient because we have been working with them for so long. An example is that we're currently migrating some of our services to AWS, and they've given us a grace period for some of the things to help with the migration and not to grow additional costs while we are migrating, but it's still on par with the market."
"Based on feedback from colleagues and friends working in the financial sector, Geneos is relatively costly. Many companies have been switching from Geneos to Dynatrace, Sysdig, or other monitoring tools in the past two years because of the price."
"Given our spend and the amount of service we have in it, the pricing is quite reasonable."
"I can say it's not that cheap because the licensing is a little bit costly"
"Pricing and licensing is based on the requirements."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
881,036 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
70%
Computer Software Company
5%
Construction Company
3%
Outsourcing Company
2%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise39
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about AWS Auto Scaling?
The tool's most valuable feature is vertical auto-scaling, which is easy to use. However, most companies now prefer horizontal scaling. I set up the health check integration to monitor CPU usage. W...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Auto Scaling?
I'm not sure about the pricing aspect of AWS Auto Scaling or the cost of it.
What needs improvement with AWS Auto Scaling?
I'm not really sure what improvements I would want to see in AWS Auto Scaling because I haven't really used it extensively or explored most of it. To the extent that I've used it so far, I think it...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ITRS Geneos?
The pricing is high. Licensing fees might be around 500$ per server monthly.
What needs improvement with ITRS Geneos?
ITRS Geneos is a legacy system. It predicts or provides proactive measures once an issue is resolved. It doesn't offer any predictive capabilities or root cause analysis. They throw a lot of data i...
What is your primary use case for ITRS Geneos?
ITRS offers multiple products, including upgrades for synthetic monitoring and a SaaS platform. Geneos is used for infrastructure monitoring, covering KPIs such as CPU, memory, processes, network l...
 

Also Known As

AWS Auto-Scaling
Geneos
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
ITRS Geneos is used by over 170 financial institutions, including JPMorgan, HSBC, RBS, Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs. Clients range from investment banks to exchanges and brokers.
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Auto Scaling vs. ITRS Geneos and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,036 professionals have used our research since 2012.