We performed a comparison between Broadcom DX Application Performance Management and Datadog based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Broadcom DX Application Performance Management offers a configuration and manager tool, code-level visibility, transaction monitoring, and a light model for monitoring servers. Datadog provides valuable features like dashboards and reporting, error reporting and log centralization, ease of use and setup, and a wide range of integrations. It also offers flexibility, observability, and the ability to search across logs from various microservices.
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management could benefit from enhancements in integration, front-end performance, support services, support for current technologies, and user experience monitoring. Datadog requires improvements in usability, integration, agent deployment, documentation, log reporting, dashboard loading time, advanced querying, and tutorials.
Service and Support: Broadcom DX Application Performance Management has faced criticism for its technical support, leaving customers unsatisfied and wanting greater assistance. Datadog's customer service and support have garnered varying feedback, with some users finding it helpful and responsive, while others have encountered unresponsive support in specific areas.
Ease of Deployment: Users had mixed experiences with the initial setup of Broadcom, with some finding it quick and simple while others found it to be a lengthier process. The initial setup of Datadog is generally regarded as uncomplicated, with some users even receiving help during the setup.
Pricing: Broadcom DX Application Performance Management has a setup cost based on a monthly licensing fee. Users recommend implementing limits on deploying the agent and pricing based on memory or CPU usage. Datadog's pricing and licensing experience differ among users. Some find it expensive while others find it reasonable compared to other solutions. Certain features can become expensive, leading to confusion with the pricing model.
Comparison Results: Datadog is the preferred choice over Broadcom DX Application Performance Management. It stands out for its easy setup, user-friendly interface, and valuable features like dashboards, error reporting, and log centralization. Users find it efficient, flexible, and highly useful for monitoring and troubleshooting.
"Attribute decoration is a unique and very powerful feature. We can add meaningful meta information based on our internal demand."
"Enables me to monitor multiple servers, applications, resources, and users"
"WAS GC monitoring enhanced our application performance and DB SQL performance."
"It is very useful and helpful with the analysis of historical performance data."
"Crash analytics goes down to the level of code you need to check."
"If we see something that we need to change or monitor, we can get it scripted pretty quickly."
"For the most part, we run constantly without any issue at this point because of APM."
"An application is quite complicated in the environment of a software reliability engineer, because our applications are like a black box. Thanks to CA APM we are able to transform this black box to a gray box by using the transaction trace functionality services. For me it's the most valuable service of the solution."
"Datadog has a lot of features to be able to drill down deep into the swath of logs that our platforms generate."
"The integration and configuration are incredibly simple. The SaaS offering is remarkably easy to set up, especially if you're coming from a Graphite environment or anything that uses a StatsD."
"Most of the features in the way Datadog does monitoring are commendable and that is the reason we choose it. We did some comparisons before picking Datadog. Datadog was recommended based on the features provided."
"It is a good one stop location where we keep all our data for our infrastructure, and it's also easier to navigate between different things."
"Datadog has made it much easier to have a central place for people to look for logs and made it much easier to notify them of any elevated error rates or failures."
"It has turned into an operational dashboard. If you felt something is going wrong, you can immediately open up Datadog. It has been our go to application because we know the answer will be there."
"Excellent autocomplete for everything in the UI."
"We rely heavily on the API crawlers that Datadog uses for cloud integrations. These allow us to pick up and leverage the tags teams have already deployed without having also to make them add them at the agent level."
"Upgradability to it is a project instead of a patch. If it was actually an automated process to where it just fed updates to our product that would be great. Now, we have to spin up an effort to actually upgrade the solution."
"Lacks some integration between all the tools."
"They need to add support for new frameworks, or at least provide a broader guide/perspectives to add them to monitoring specific agents to retrieve metrics with thresholds as a reference to guide the customer as to where they must go to achieve this."
"With respect to SQL monitoring, it would be nice to have a little more information because it doesn't provide the full statement all of the time."
"The area of improvement is related to the areas of application onboarding and instrumentation, where the product has certain shortcomings."
"One of the challenges is agent releases. So as we employ agents, they are done relatively manually. A little bit of automating of agent release would be helpful."
"It doesn't have a proper database, and the configuration is very difficult."
"The stability could be more reliable."
"Since the Datadog platform has so many separate features, solving so many use cases, there are often inconsistencies in feature availability and interoperability between products."
"I would like the tooling to have better integration in Slack, specifically sending out reminders to the relevant people to take breaks, do a retrospective, and specify with emojis which messages to log."
"To be very fair, I haven't had enough experience with Datadog to pick out improvements."
"Datadog could improve the flexibility with AI and ML concepts. This will allow customers to be more leveraged towards publishing."
"It lacks consistency in the APIs."
"It can be overwhelming for new people as it has a lot of features."
"I want to applaud the efforts in making the UI extremely usable and approachable. My suggestion would be to take another look at how the menu structure is put together, however. Even after using the platform mostly every day for months, I still find myself trying to find a service or feature in the menus."
"At the beginning, when we started throwing logs at it, there was a bit of hiccup. However, this was during their beta period, so hiccups were expected."
More Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is ranked 22nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 161 reviews while Datadog is ranked 1st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 137 reviews. Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is rated 8.0, while Datadog is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management writes "Provides efficiency in migration and DAW but requires a high level of administrator knowledge for configuration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, BMC TrueSight Operations Management and New Relic, whereas Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability. See our Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs. Datadog report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Container Monitoring 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.