We performed a comparison between IBM Application Performance Management and New Relic 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."I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"The transaction tracking feature from IBM is the most important feature for us. It is something that provides a terrific value for us and our clients. It has a lot of data sources and agents that are collectors. It is also stable."
"It's easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the breakdown that it provides, such as a description of the fields for a particular transaction."
"The initial setup was straightforward and took minimal effort."
"IBM Application Performance Management helped us increased our response time by 80% and cost 60% less."
"Because we have partnerships with other partners, I can share a bit about what I've noticed with IBM APM compared to other vendor solutions. Specifically, with IBM, the visibility into detailed process information is more tangible. On the OS level, APM displays all processes (or the top 10 processes) that are consuming CPU or resident memory. This is the most important thing that is not always available with other vendors."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It is easy to track and easy to follow."
"They have baseline level alerting."
"There are many valuable features in New Relic APM. We developed some software applications and we are able to monitor the errors very easily. Their log security retention is very good."
"Their technical support is pretty good and responsive. We have a real good relationship with them."
"The most valuable features are infrastructure monitoring and application performance monitoring (APM)."
"Working with the solution is very easy. It's user-friendly."
"We appreciate the way that this solution allows us to monitor the ongoing status of the UI at any given time."
"The solution offers good documentation."
"Technical support can be slow and needs improvement."
"Its web user interface is a little bit old in comparison to other solutions, such as New Relic, and it should be improved. Its scalability and technical support should also be improved. Currently, it is scalable, but only in a vertical way. They provide good technical support, but the initial steps for a new case can be improved to fasten the resolution process."
"They should focus on potentially enhancing the dashboard to make it more contemporary and adding some customization options. Furthermore, there might be room for improvement in the pricing policy."
"It's still missing some platforms. For example, if you look to applications itself, it is missing the interface."
"The stability is not great and should be better."
"The demo that was provided to us is not working very well. At times, there are errors."
"With APM, we noticed that the agent can cause a lot of issues for the application, making the agent very unreliable. Many issues are happening, and we've had to discuss it with support to try and get a fix. It affects application availability, and sometimes actions fail because of the agent, degrading the performance of the application."
"One thing I'd like to see in any APM, especially New Relic, is the ability to use distributed transactions. When one microservice calls another, it calls another database and microservice. The entire data visualization layer will not be able to correlate from one microservice from end to end and return on that path. Distributed transactions would be a great addition that would make life simpler. Unfortunately, no APM has that end-to-end capability."
"There has been some problem with the agent, and it is just not working well. It is not able to record information with the application server. They have been able to fix the issue, but it took quite a long time. This is the main issue in the APM products and also in New Relic. The mobile application monitoring has been pretty difficult to set up and also quite expensive. It should be a little bit easier and cheaper. Because it is pretty difficult and expensive, many customers don't take it."
"I would like to see the company implement the AI auto-baseline feature which Dynatrace has."
"The monitoring is only as good as the alerts that it produces. By having it set up fine grain alerting, it is a bit of a pain."
"New Relic needs to improve is the user data schema."
"I haven't come across any features that are lacking."
"New Relic is very slow, and the app is a bit frustrating to use, which is something that has been happening a lot in the past year. During the last six months, I have noticed that it has become extremely laggy."
"The product has good documentation for Linux, however, their documentation for Windows is lacking substantially. It's something they need to develop."
More IBM Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Application Performance Management is ranked 54th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 7 reviews while New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 152 reviews. IBM Application Performance Management is rated 6.4, while New Relic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM Application Performance Management writes "A multi-functional solution but has poor stability and performance-related issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of New Relic writes "Has a simple user interface and end-to-end monitoring and self-healing features". IBM Application Performance Management is most compared with Instana Dynamic APM, Dynatrace, BMC Compuware Strobe, IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and AppDynamics, whereas New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Prometheus. See our IBM Application Performance Management vs. New Relic 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.