New Relic Network Monitoring

Name: New Relic Network Monitoring
Brand: New Relic
Rating: 4.5 (2545 reviews)

Leader

Data for Engineers

Est 2007|Valuation $6.1B|Raised $385.3M

LinkedIn 188K|Website|Web traffic 1.3M|FTEs 3,034|HQ San Francisco, California, US

MarketsInfrastructure Monitoring Observability Platform

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

Where New Relic tends to be effective - When an organization already relies on New Relic for APM and service-level triage, adding SNMP/flow/syslog can reduce the time required to determine whether an issue is network-related because telemetry from multiple domains is queryable and visualized together. - New Relic documentation recommends using both SNMP and flow telemetry to obtain broader network visibility and provides guided onboarding resources. Where competitors are often preferred - Kentik: Provides deeper network-observability heritage and flow analytics, with network-centric workflows and higher visibility into flow-level analysis. - LogicMonitor / SolarWinds / Auvik / PRTG / OpManager: Offer more mature network-operations features (device lifecycle, configuration backup in some tools, topology features) that are often preferred by network operations teams focused on device management. - Datadog: Offers broad integrations and network monitoring modules; however, potential buyers should evaluate pricing structure for multiple modules and expected data volumes. Adoption signals / market presence - Marketplace comparison and review platforms can provide directional signals of engagement and preference, but platform-derived "mindshare" metrics are not equivalent to formal market-share measures and should be treated as indicative rather than definitive.

	New Relic Network Monitoring	Datadog Network Performance Monitoring	LogicMonitor
Starting Price (public)	Published offering includes a free tier with a limited ingest allowance; paid model combines user and ingest billing; published overage rates are available from the vendor	Pricing is modular and public-facing with per-resource and per-feature components; exact costs depend on selected modules and can rise with additional products	Public list pricing shows packages with per-resource or per-unit components; exact costs depend on selected packages and resource counts
Primary use case	Teams already using New Relic who want network telemetry correlated with applications and infrastructure	Cloud-first teams seeking integrated network monitoring with broad integrations and analytics	Organizations requiring device-centric workflows and broad infrastructure monitoring coverage
Key strength	Correlation of network telemetry with APM, infrastructure metrics, logs, and traces in one platform; flexible query language (NRQL) for ad hoc analysis	Broad integrations and analytics in cloud-native contexts; integrated product ecosystem	Traditional NMS-style workflows (device discovery, inventory, topology, and device-focused monitoring)
Key weakness	Ingest/cardinality cost risk at scale; some network-operations workflows are less feature-rich than purpose-built NMS tools; requires managing an additional collector tier	Modular pricing and feature selection can lead to higher-than-expected costs; onboarding complexity at scale	Pricing and licensing can be challenging at scale; feature sets differ by package and may require negotiation

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

Where New Relic tends to be effective

When an organization already relies on New Relic for APM and service-level triage, adding SNMP/flow/syslog can reduce the time required to determine whether an issue is network-related because telemetry from multiple domains is queryable and visualized together.
New Relic documentation recommends using both SNMP and flow telemetry to obtain broader network visibility and provides guided onboarding resources.

Where competitors are often preferred

Kentik: Provides deeper network-observability heritage and flow analytics, with network-centric workflows and higher visibility into flow-level analysis.
LogicMonitor / SolarWinds / Auvik / PRTG / OpManager: Offer more mature network-operations features (device lifecycle, configuration backup in some tools, topology features) that are often preferred by network operations teams focused on device management.
Datadog: Offers broad integrations and network monitoring modules; however, potential buyers should evaluate pricing structure for multiple modules and expected data volumes.

Adoption signals / market presence

Marketplace comparison and review platforms can provide directional signals of engagement and preference, but platform-derived "mindshare" metrics are not equivalent to formal market-share measures and should be treated as indicative rather than definitive.

	New Relic Network Monitoring	Datadog Network Performance Monitoring	LogicMonitor
Starting Price (public)	Published offering includes a free tier with a limited ingest allowance; paid model combines user and ingest billing; published overage rates are available from the vendor	Pricing is modular and public-facing with per-resource and per-feature components; exact costs depend on selected modules and can rise with additional products	Public list pricing shows packages with per-resource or per-unit components; exact costs depend on selected packages and resource counts
Primary use case	Teams already using New Relic who want network telemetry correlated with applications and infrastructure	Cloud-first teams seeking integrated network monitoring with broad integrations and analytics	Organizations requiring device-centric workflows and broad infrastructure monitoring coverage
Key strength	Correlation of network telemetry with APM, infrastructure metrics, logs, and traces in one platform; flexible query language (NRQL) for ad hoc analysis	Broad integrations and analytics in cloud-native contexts; integrated product ecosystem	Traditional NMS-style workflows (device discovery, inventory, topology, and device-focused monitoring)
Key weakness	Ingest/cardinality cost risk at scale; some network-operations workflows are less feature-rich than purpose-built NMS tools; requires managing an additional collector tier	Modular pricing and feature selection can lead to higher-than-expected costs; onboarding complexity at scale	Pricing and licensing can be challenging at scale; feature sets differ by package and may require negotiation