CloudBolt vs Morpheus comparison

CloudBolt and Morpheus Data are both solutions in the Cloud Management category. CloudBolt is ranked #19 with an average rating of 7.3, while Morpheus Data is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.9. CloudBolt holds a 2.2% mindshare in CM, compared to Morpheus Data’s 6.8% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of CloudBolt users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 75% of Morpheus Data users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

CloudBolt and Morpheus are competing products in the cloud management platform space. CloudBolt shows advantages with customization and integration, whereas Morpheus stands out in multi-cloud management and automation.

Features: CloudBolt is valued for its flexibility in integrating with workflows, allowing customization during deployments, and powerful cost management features. The role-based access control and extensive cloud provider support add more appeal to CloudBolt. On the other hand, Morpheus provides solid automation tools, seamless integration with APIs of other platforms, and user-friendly multi-cloud service capabilities. Its intuitive user interface enhances the user experience, and its robust API integrations with top cloud vendors streamline processes.

Room for Improvement: CloudBolt could work on enhancing some of its automation processes and expand its support for more third-party integrations directly in the system. Improving the sophistication of its analytics and reporting features may bring additional value. Morpheus may improve by simplifying its deployment setup and could refine its support for legacy network configurations. Additionally, advancing the functionality of the self-service catalog and refining its multi-cloud integration strategy can make it even more effective.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: CloudBolt facilitates an easy deployment process with robust customer support, making it a preferred option for smooth, quick transitions. Morpheus requires a more involved setup yet offers extensive documentation and support to manage complex deployments efficiently. Its setup may suit large-scale operations that appreciate detailed service offerings.

Pricing and ROI: CloudBolt's pricing model is competitive and aims to minimize entry barriers, optimizing ROI for small to medium-sized enterprises. Morpheus, though initially higher in cost, promises ROI with advanced resource optimization and detailed feature sets, targeting enterprises with significant cloud management needs.

To learn more, read our detailed CloudBolt vs. Morpheus Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

CloudBolt vs. Morpheus

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 823,875 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

IBM Turbonomic

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Cloud Management category, the mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 6.3%, down from 6.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CloudBolt is 2.2%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Morpheus is 6.8%, up from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Management

Featured Reviews

SubashSubbiah

Assistant Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

It can tell us where performance is lagging on the hardware layer, but the reporting on the application layer is lacking

The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer. I would like them to add some apps for physical device load resourcing and physical-to-virtual calculation. It gives excellent recommendations for the virtual layer but doesn't have the capabilities for physical-to-virtual analysis. Automated deployment is something else they could add. Some built-in automation features are helpful, but we aren't effectively using a few. We want a few more automated features, like autoscaling and automatic performance optimization testing would be useful.

Read full review

Adalberto Barbosa Da Costa Lobato

Cloud Solutions Architect at gwcloud.company

A stable product with excellent cloud management features and a helpful support team

The ability to manage most clouds is helpful, especially with extremely large organizations where we have multiple cloud providers, and we cannot centralize management. It was one of the areas that really helped us, especially with managing and mapping resources. We also used CloudBolt to find a shadow IT resource. Nobody knew what they were doing or who was responsible for them.

Read full review

MarkWittling

NFV Cloud Architect at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees

Seamless upgrades, stable, and easy to deploy

We've been facing some challenges with Morpheus due to its design for public cloud usage. Their main focus is on allowing customers to deploy virtual machines to Azure, Google Cloud, AWS (and other private or public clouds they support). They provide features such as guidance and cost optimization. However, we're using Morpheus for on-prem v center clouds, which is probably not the user base norm. We are very pleased with the dashboard and multi-tenancy capabilities, but there are some challenges when deploying and configuring the more complex Telco workloads that have advanced networking. The integration of the NSX-T needs to be refactored. As I have been working on the API, there are some issues with the workflow engine in the automation that need to be addressed. For example, I need to be able to flag a task as fail or continue on fail if something goes wrong in the workflow. Currently, if one of the tasks in a twenty-task workflow fails, the remaining nineteen are not run, which can be a problem if one of those tasks is critical, such as when patching or doing security tasks. Thus, workflow enhancements and improvements are necessary. Morpheus desires the ability to control the full life cycle of a virtual machine from beginning to end. We have many vendors who want to establish virtual machines, but we want users to access them through Morpheus. We want the VMs to be provisioned from an external system and then be managed in Morpheus so users can only perform limited activities without being able to delete or provision them. We are currently working on resolving this issue, which I refer to as reconciliation. I have asked the developers to implement multi-tenancy, where each tenant has their own landing page at a unique URL. However, we are using groups, not tenants, so there are features we can do with tenants that we cannot do with groups. Specifically, I am trying to get the developers to add notifications support so that when a group member logs in to the Morpheus portal, they can be informed of their VMs' maintenance schedule at a specific time. This is a feature I have requested them to add. We are generally pleased with Morpheus, however, due to some restraints and restrictions, we are utilizing it differently than the majority of its users. This creates some difficulty.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The proactive monitoring of all our open enrollment applications has improved our organization. We have used it to size applications that we are moving to the cloud. Therefore, when we move them out there, we have them appropriately sized. We use it for reporting to current application owners, showing them where they are wasting money. There are easy things to find for an application, e.g., they decommissioned the server, but they never took care of the storage. Without a tool like this, that storage would just sit there forever, with us getting billed for it."

"My favorite part of the solution is the automation scheduling. Being able to choose when actions happen, and how they happen..."

"I like Turbonomic's automation and AI machine learning features. It shows you what it can do, but it can also act on recommendations automatically. Integration with an APM system makes the AI/ML features truly effective. Understanding what the application is doing and the trends of application behavior can help you make real-world decisions and act on that information."

"The most important feature to us is an objective measurement of VM headroom per cluster. In addition, the ability to check for the right-sizing of VMs."

"It has automated a lot of things. We have saved 30 to 35 percent in human resource time and cost, which is pretty substantial. We don't have a big workforce here, so we have to use all the automation we can get."

"The automation and orchestration components are definitely the best part, as you can tell it what it can do and when, and just let it be."

"Turbonomic can show us if we're not using some of our storage volumes efficiently in AWS. For example, if we've over-provisioned one of our virtual machines to have dedicated IOPs that it doesn't need, Turbonomic will detect that and tell us."

"The notifications saying, "This is a corrective action," even though some of them can be automated, are always welcome to see. They summarize your entire infrastructure and how you can better utilize it. That is the biggest feature."

More IBM Turbonomic pros

"I find the self-service features valuable."

"The solution's biggest advantage is flexibility"

"Hybrid cloud platform for VM and app deployment and management, with very good stability. It's customizable, easy to set up, and can be deployed within half an hour."

"Role-based access control and application blueprinting."

"The initial deployment was super easy."

"The most beneficial features for us were the API integrations with various cloud vendors like Nutanix, VMware, AWS, Azure, and GCP. It saved us the effort of doing that work ourselves."

"Morpheus provides a very easy and one-click solution to scaling up and down."

"The most valuable feature of Morpheus is its strong integration with vSphere Cloud."

"Morpheus is an intuitive solution that is very easy to use."

"The most valuable feature for me was cost optimization."

"Provides a good automation platform."

"The multi-cloud integrations and the DevOps and operational integrations are the most valuable. Morpheus platform is a centralized set to manage different clouds and your on-premise platforms. It does a very good job of what it is designed to do. It is very good in terms of features. It is extremely stable and easy to install. It is also very scalable. Their support is also extremely good."

"It supports many features, and it also supports some of the automation that Cloudify supports. So, in addition to just giving you basic platform management—such as the ability to deploy virtual machines and have multitenancy to log in and perform all of your basic platform management tasks—it also supports automation. You can, for example, spin up three virtual machines, and you can have each virtual machine configure each other. You can do service chaining with it. You can run scripts in Dash and Python, or you can use tools like Ansible, Puppet, or Chef. All of this is just built into the tool. It is a very powerful tool."

More Morpheus pros

Cons

"It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines."

"The issue for us with the automation is we are considering starting to do the hot adds, but there are some problems with Windows Server 2019 and hot adds. It is a little buggy. So, if we turn that on with a cluster that has a lot of Windows 2019 Servers, then we would see a blue screen along with a lot of applications as well. Depending on what you are adding, cores or memory, it doesn't necessarily even take advantage of that at that moment. A reboot may be required, and we can't do that until later. So, that decreases the benefit of the real-time. For us, there is a lot of risk with real-time."

"There is room for improvement [with] upgrades. We have deployed the newer version, version 8 of Turbonomic. The problem is that there is no way to upgrade between major Turbonomic versions. You can upgrade minor versions without a problem, but when you go from version 6 to version 7, or version 7 to version 8, you basically have to deploy it new and let it start gathering data again. That is a problem because all of the data, all of the savings calculations that had been done on the old version, are gone. There's no way to keep track of your lifetime savings across versions."

"It would be good for Turbonomic, on their side, to integrate with other companies like AppDynamics or SolarWinds or other monitoring softwares. I feel that the actual monitoring of applications, mixed in with their abilities, would help. That would be the case wherever Turbonomic lacks the ability to monitor an application or in cases where applications are so customized that it's not going to be able to handle them. There is monitoring that you can do with scripting that you may not be able to do with Turbonomic."

"The GUI and policy creation have room for improvement. There should be a better view of some of the numbers that are provided and easier to access. And policy creation should have it easier to identify groups."

"I like the detail I get in the old user interface and will miss some of that in the new interface when we perform our planned upgrade soon."

"Recovering resources when they're not needed is not as optimized as it could be."

"Remove the need for special in-house knowledge and development."

More IBM Turbonomic cons

"The solution is not easy to use. It's not intuitive enough to click anywhere in the solution and make it work."

"The scheduling feature of CloudBolt needs improvement because sometimes, it doesn't work."

"Could increase the number of integrations and add more out-of-the-box work flows."

"The management of SaaS must be improved."

"The area of integrating on-prem and cloud needs improvement."

"I faced a few problems while deploying."

"We've been facing some challenges with Morpheus due to its design for public cloud usage."

"The solution's pricing and customization need to improve."

"We had to put in much effort ourselves since Morpheus's support wasn't always available to help us."

"There is room for enhancement in integrating Morpheus with other solutions."

"Morpheus is working hard on creating an integration framework due for release in Q2 2021 which will allow clients to create their own interfaces and integrations into any 3rd party product that has a full-function API. Morpheus is also heavily focussed on enhancing the container management side to compete head-to-head with Openshift and CloudForms in Q3 2021."

"The product has become overly complex. The biggest problem is that we find a bug, they fix the bug, but then another one pops up. We can never really deliver on the vision we had using Morpheus."

"The tool could support virtual network functions better. It is really good at doing enterprise-type of things, but one of the things on which we're working with them is loading very complex virtual machines with it, such as Juniper SRX routers. It needs to support more complex virtualized resources a little bit better. Aside from that, it is a terrific tool. We really like it."

More Morpheus cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is in line with the other solutions that we have. It's not a bargain software, nor is it overly expensive."

"It is an endpoint type license, which is fine. It is not overly expensive."

"I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one server. It's not cost-effective if we have to pay more for those. When I move around a VM SQL box with 30 cores and a half-terabyte of RAM, I'm not paying for an entire socket and cores where people assume you have at least 10 or 20 VMs on that socket for that pricing."

"It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."

"IBM Turbonomic is an investment that we believe will deliver positive returns."

"Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."

"In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."

"The product is fairly priced right now. Given its capabilities, it is excellently priced. We think that the product will become self-funding because we will be able to maximize our resources, which will help us from a capacity perspective. That should save us money in the long run."

More IBM Turbonomic pricing and cost advice

"I rate the pricing an eight out of ten because the solution is expensive."

"The system is cheaper if a customer has fewer servers since you pay by the node."

"The solution is reasonably priced."

"Morpheus doesn't directly support cost optimization, but its API integration can facilitate resource optimization. It doesn't dynamically optimize resources like an aeronautic system would; it operates step by step."

"Initially, the license may seem like a good deal, but as we grow, it becomes costly."

"Licensing is on an annual basis, and it is upfront for the year. There is no extra cost unless you want additional support or specific deployment packs."

"The license is based on the number of virtual machines that Morpheus is managing. So, it is a pay-as-you-grow model."

"The solution is cheaper if you have less number of servers, but it becomes very expensive for a large number of servers."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

20%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

10%

Manufacturing Company

Educational Organization

31%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?

It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Turbonomic?

The implementation could be enhanced.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?

We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting...

See all answers

What do you like most about CloudBolt?

I find the self-service features valuable.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudBolt?

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten because the solution is expensive. The license is expensive to acquire.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudBolt?

The area of integrating on-prem and cloud needs improvement. Another area that the solution needs to improve on is th...

See all answers

What do you like most about Morpheus?

The most beneficial features for us were the API integrations with various cloud vendors like Nutanix, VMware, AWS, A...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Morpheus?

We've been a Morpheus customer since the early days. I know what they're trying to sell now, and you'd really need a ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Morpheus?

The product has become overly complex. The biggest problem is that we find a bug, they fix the bug, but then another ...

See all answers

Comparisons

VMware Aria Operations vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 20% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 13% of the time

VMware vSphere vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 9% of the time

Cisco Intersight vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 9% of the time

Intel Granulate vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 2% of the time

More IBM Turbonomic Competitors

VMware Aria Automation vs CloudBolt

Compared 13% of the time

BMC Helix Cloud Security vs CloudBolt

Compared 10% of the time

BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management vs CloudBolt

Compared 8% of the time

Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM) vs CloudBolt

Compared 6% of the time

VMware Aria Operations vs CloudBolt

Compared 6% of the time

More CloudBolt Competitors

VMware Aria Automation vs Morpheus

Compared 28% of the time

Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM) vs Morpheus

Compared 15% of the time

VMware Cloud Director vs Morpheus

Compared 9% of the time

Cloudify vs Morpheus

Compared 6% of the time

Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI) vs Morpheus

Compared 2% of the time

More Morpheus Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Turbonomic

December 2024

Download IBM Turbonomic product report

Buyer's Guide

CloudBolt

December 2024

Download CloudBolt product report

Buyer's Guide

Morpheus

November 2024

Download Morpheus product report

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager

No data available

Morpheus Cloud Management Platform, Morpheus CMP

Learn More

Video not available

IBM

CloudBolt

Morpheus Data

Interactive Demo

IBM

Demo not available

CloudBolt

Demo not available

Morpheus Data

Overview

IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by companies to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions.

IBM Turbonomic leverages AI to continuously analyze application resource consumption, deliver insights and dashboards, and make real-time adjustments. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. By integrating with various cloud platforms, on-premise infrastructures, and containers, IBM Turbonomic provides a holistic view of the environment, ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently.

The solution is designed to support complex IT environments, offering actionable insights and automated actions that help IT teams proactively manage application performance and infrastructure resources. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years.

IBM Turbonomic manages resources across hybrid and on-premises data centers to ensure efficiency and financial impact awareness. It automates resource allocation, balances memory dynamically, and provides robust performance metrics. Users benefit from its ability to prevent resource starvation and offer cost-saving recommendations through continuous management. Executive Dashboards provide insights for cost justification and resource management, making IT operations simpler with AI-driven automation and actionable recommendations.

What are the most important features of IBM Turbonomic?

Automated Resource Allocation: Dynamically allocates resources for optimal performance.
Dynamic Memory Balancing: Adjusts memory allocation to prevent resource shortages.
Right-Sizing: Sizes VMs accurately for Azure and on-prem environments.
Single Platform Management: Manages resources across hybrid and on-premises data centers.
Proactive Performance Optimization: Continuously optimizes performance to prevent issues.
Kubernetes Support: Enhances container management with robust support.
Cost-Saving Recommendations: Provides actionable tips for reducing expenses.

What benefits should users look for in IBM Turbonomic reviews?

Cost Reduction: Helps minimize expenses through efficient resource management.
Performance Improvement: Enhances application performance by preventing resource starvation.
Detailed Insights: Offers comprehensive analytics to justify costs and resource utilization.
Simplified IT Processes: Uses AI automation to streamline operations.

IBM Turbonomic is implemented across multiple industries, including finance for optimizing peak payroll processing, IT for enhanced virtual server management, and healthcare for reliable performance monitoring. Organizations benefit from its robust automation, ensuring maximum efficiency and cost savings.

CloudBolt supports a variety of cloud technologies, from on-premises virtualization and private cloud to a wide range public and hybrid cloud configurations.

No need to rip-and-replace. CloudBolt provides easy import, syncing, and management of legacy deployments even as it helps you build out new cloud environments.

CloudBolt lets administrators create and maintain configuration standards while developing a reusable library of service and application templates.

Morpheus is a 100% agnostic cloud management platform (CMP) designed from the ground up to unify management of multi-cloud and hybrid IT while empowering DevOps teams with self-service provisioning of bare metal, VM, and container-based application services.

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.

WM, CyWest, Panic, Camden, University of Maryland, Xerox, Neustar, Medidata, Continu, Aruba Networks, Neuberger Berman, Peak6, EverBank, Ascensus, Hosting Edge

Morpheus CMP, mcdonalds, blackrock, HSBC, astrazeneca, arris, WGU, GBG, pennstate, beyondtrust

Buyer's Guide

CloudBolt vs. Morpheus

December 2024

Free Report: CloudBolt vs. Morpheus

Find out what your peers are saying about CloudBolt vs. Morpheus and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CloudBolt vs. Morpheus report.

See our list of best Cloud Management vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Management 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.