Why teams are evaluating FireHydrant alternatives
Missing native monitoring
FireHydrant requires external monitoring tools and 350+ integrations for alert detection. Teams manage multiple subscriptions for monitoring, incident coordination, and alerting—adding cost and complexity compared to a unified platform.
Alerting charged separately
FireHydrant Signals (alerting) is charged by volume on top of per-user pricing. As alert volume grows, costs become unpredictable. Teams need to budget for both user seats and alert volume, making TCO harder to forecast.
Integration complexity
While FireHydrant offers 350+ integrations and extensive API endpoints, teams spend time maintaining connections between monitoring tools, alerting systems, and incident coordination. Upstat eliminates this overhead with native monitoring built in.
AI features vs operational efficiency
FireHydrant emphasizes AI-enhanced retrospectives that auto-generate findings from incident data. Teams evaluate whether AI-assisted analysis justifies the cost and complexity of managing separate monitoring infrastructure.