We performed a comparison between Dynatrace and OpenText Real User Monitoring 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."The best part of Dynatrace is that the tool is very lightweight and very easy to install."
"The most valuable feature of the solution would be the level of visibility that you get. I haven't seen anything that gives us that level of visibility yet"
"Most importantly the back-end components. Most of the back-end components that the application connects to; nobody knows how our application interacts with, for example, the DataPower Gateway. But AppMon really provides that information for us. So finding the gaps is the key here."
"We got firsthand RCA as soon as we finished implementation."
"It has helped us improve the performance of many of our applications."
"The most valuable feature is, I can quickly go to the PurePath and find the problem in the application. I can say that it provides me a way by which I can quickly find the root cause of the problem."
"Dynatrace makes it so much easier to proactively solve problems before they become big headaches, and easily pinpoint the root cause of an issue."
"It is useful for analytics, web performance, end-to-end coverage of a user experience, and database analytics. It is absolutely a monitoring tool that is worth having. The visibility that it provides is a unique feature of this product."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The most useful feature of this solution is tracking. When the application's traffic has been monitored it is taken from that particular application and analyzed. It is then given a live session of that particular user. For example, if you are using your bank application to do some kind of transaction, everything that you do can be tracked by that application."
"Very easy to implement."
"The Real User Monitor, with its transaction and synthetic transaction monitoring, is the typical classic in APM cases when the customer would like to do transaction monitoring. Micro Focus scores better where the underlying infrastructure management is also covered by Micro Focus tools."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"As we move into using more AWS native architectures, it should support everything that we want to do. We don't want to adopt another tool."
"Waiting for the session replay needs improvement."
"Improvements in Synthetic monitoring would be great. Certain features of thick client, if available in the web interface, would also be a great improvement."
"If we can gain more insight into older applications, using not-so-recent technologies, then it would be a plus."
"We should be able to easily simplify both the charting and slicing-and-dicing of user metrics with cookies that contain customer/user information."
"The pricing of the product could be improved."
"Richer, deeper partner channel: It needs to expand and deepen the business use cases, where their solutions can help."
"The initial setup was relatively complex because we were trying to implement into environments that they did not yet support."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
"Real User Monitor needs to cover more protocols to provide more in-depth information. It could also be better at monitoring voice-related traffic. There is currently no visibility in that channel."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"Some issues with login errors."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"Everybody is moving away from traffic and installing agents on the application to do the job, but Micro Focus is using traditional ways to collect the traffic. They should change their architecture completely."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dynatrace is ranked 2nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 341 reviews while OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 46th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews. Dynatrace is rated 8.8, while OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2. 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 OpenText Real User Monitoring writes "The reports and metrics we collect help us to improve our services". Dynatrace is most compared with Datadog, New Relic, AppDynamics, Splunk Enterprise Security and Azure Monitor, whereas OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with AppDynamics, Honeycomb.io and VMware Aria Operations for Applications. See our Dynatrace vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring 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.