We performed a comparison between Dynatrace and IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is easy to see what areas you want to alert on and catch."
"Scalability is outstanding. It won't tax our environment at all as it will scale sideways."
"The stuff that's coming with the new pieces around the Dynatrace Managed SaaS implementation. The ease of implementation there is significant. We've spent a lot of time with AppMon and DC RUM - that's a lot of time to set up, configure. With Managed solution, you just drop it in and everything pretty much auto-instruments."
"It gives you a great level of detail into whatever the issue is: Using troubleshooting and getting to the root cause."
"We scaled from 300 agents to 800 agents in six months. There were no issues at the server level, which is pretty good."
"Helps us to see the troubleshooting points or what is hiccuping. This is where we go. We reboot, fix it, or do whatever it takes for it to be taken care of."
"We can know exactly what happened in what time with PurePath."
"The Transaction Flow diagram and the class and meta level information, those are really key selling points in the automation for AppMon. Also, the meta level instrumentation and the dashboards that most of the people use in our organization."
"The solution is very stable. We never had any issues with stability."
"IBM's main value lies in its integration with its own technologies, which can be seen as a benefit in environments where IBM products are extensively used."
"I do not like the performance of the UI. It is really slow."
"The web interface, in some cases, is a little ambiguous to use."
"This solution would be improved with the addition of annotations for automated custom metrics creation."
"The new Managed Edition is too complex. I feel like a fish out of water."
"Hard to use for beginners, to setup and explore."
"The installation process had quite a few moving parts, so it was a little tricky getting everything to work in first go."
"I do not like after 60 days or 90 days it gets aggregated to summary data. I would like to be able to analyze specific PurePaths after 30 days or 60 days with real numbers."
"The initial setup was relatively complex because we were trying to implement into environments that they did not yet support."
"The installation process is difficult, requiring continuous support and specialist expertise due to our limited knowledge of managing it effectively."
"The user interface was not good."
More IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dynatrace is ranked 2nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 341 reviews while IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is ranked 55th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 2 reviews. Dynatrace is rated 8.8, while IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of Dynatrace writes "AI identifies all the components of a response-time issue or failure, hugely benefiting our triage efforts". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager writes "Integrates well with IBM technologies, but it's outdated and lacks essential features". Dynatrace is most compared with Datadog, New Relic, AppDynamics, Splunk Enterprise Security and Azure Monitor, whereas IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is most compared with IBM Application Performance Management and Azure Monitor. See our Dynatrace vs. IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.