We compared Datadog and Pandora FMS across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Datadog users like its customizable displays, error tracking, and advanced AI/ML capabilities. Pandora FMS is highly regarded for its straightforward management process, effective dashboards, and efficient network monitoring capabilities.
Room for Improvement: Datadog could enhance its usability and reduce its learning curve. Users said integration was another pain point. Users say Pandora FMS could make its dashboards more customizable and improve its integration with other systems. Many also said they would like Pandora to add APIs for integration and offer better out-of-the-box analytics.
Service and Support: While many users spoke highly of Datadog’s support team, others reported slow support responses, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. Pandora FMS support received high praise for their expertise, kindness, and fast response time.
Ease of Deployment: Datadog’s setup is considered straightforward, and users often receive help from a partner or vendor. Most users found Pandora FMS’s initial setup to be relatively easy.
Pricing: Opinions about Datadog's price are divided. Some users found it costly, but others thought it was acceptable. Some said the pricing model could be clearer and better explained. Pandora FMS is considered reasonably priced, and the total cost depends on the environment.
ROI: Users said Datadog saved them time and improved visibility into security blind spots. Pandora FMS has also demonstrated advantages in terms of return on investment.
Comparison Results: Datadog is praised for its customizability, easy setup, and robust AI features, but some users say it has room for improvement in areas like usability and integration. Datadog’s pricing and customer service received mixed reviews. Users like Pandora FMS’s management and monitoring capabilities as well as its dashboards, but the solution has been criticized for its compatibility issues, limited customization options, and slower performance.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"Even if we don't end up using Datadog, it revealed problems and optimizations to us that weren't obvious before."
"The visibility that it provides is valuable. It is helping in being proactive around incident management. It is helping us to be able to get more visibility into our customers' applications so that we can assist them at the application layer. We also provide them the infrastructure from an AWS standpoint. We are able to make sure that our customers are aware of certain critical things around the analytical piece of either the network or the application. We're able to call customers before they even know about the issue. From there, we can start putting together some change management processes and help them a bit."
"It helps us better manage our logs."
"The full stack of integrations made it easier to monitor the different technologies and platform providers, including Software as a Service providers, that otherwise would need a lot of work and customization to be able to see what is happening."
"Datadog has helped us a ton by allowing us to set up a multitude of easily configurable alarms across our tech stack and infrastructure."
"The feature I have found most valuable is when I can reuse existing monitors and alerts for new dashboards."
"The most valuable feature is the dashboards that are provided out of the box, as well as ones we were able to configure."
"I like the amount of tooling and the number of solutions they sold with their monitoring. Datadog was highly intuitive to use."
"The official forum is active enough to answer most of the high-end technical questions that you may have."
"The solution has good dashboards and graphics."
"We are able to control our business with this all-in-one monitoring tool."
"Pandora's architecture is interesting. It's open so you can easily extend and enhance it. It's simpler to customize Pandora compared to other solutions. It's also scalable enough to support large environments."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"The solution is so lightweight that with only 4GB of ram, it allows keeping track of up to two hundred agents from a single console."
"What I value most about Pandora FMS is the simplicity of working with it."
"The most valuable feature is that it is an all-in-one monitoring system."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"It could probably be a little bit of a better user experience."
"It seems that admin cost control granularity is an afterthought."
"We would really like to see more from the Service Catalog."
"They should continue expanding and integrating with more third-party apps."
"Auto instrumentation on tracing has not been very easy to find in the documentation."
"Stability of the product has been a concern for us outside of the primary monitoring agents."
"I would love to see support for front-end and mobile applications. Right now, it is mostly all back-end stuff. Being able to do some integration with our front-end products would be awesome."
"Lately, chat support has a longer waiting time."
"Improvements are needed for server and network discovery, including service-based discovery."
"It would be useful if Pandora FMS included an ISO image (or «software appliance») for each big company that leases virtual private machines (VPS), just like in AWS."
"I would like to have a dashboard with all assets displayed, with a quick hover-over status."
"Pandora could deliver better analytics out of the box. You can work around these limitations with the help of other tools like Grafana. The shortcomings are mostly on the graphical side. The built-in report generators are a bit limited in some areas."
"We would like the real-time monitoring of an interface to be improved within this solution."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Datadog is ranked 2nd in Network Monitoring Software with 137 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 28th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our Datadog vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.