We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and AppDynamics based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure Monitor is the recommended choice over AppDynamics due to its cost-effectiveness, seamless integration with Microsoft technologies, and customizable out-of-the-box functionalities. AppDynamics, while offering various valuable features, is pricey, has a steep learning curve, and lacks a satisfactory end-user experience. Azure Monitor is praised for its application insights, troubleshooting capabilities, ease of configuration and maintenance, and proactive infrastructure information, resulting in a positive ROI.
"That visual representation’s been really good, also the overhead that AppDynamics creates is quite small. We've tried Dynatrace in the past. Some of the applications didn't work as well with Dynatrace."
"The most valuable feature of AppDynamics is its ability to track the transactions between different applications."
"After we implemented this solution, we can easily determine the root cause of issues."
"We're a large organization, so we appreciate AppDynamics' wide coverage. It may not work in all areas, but it has broad coverage. We can use the same dataset for different use case aspects. That is the beauty of AppDynamics. You can coordinate APM, EUM, and infrastructure through one dataset."
"Error analysis in the troubleshooting sections go straight to the point."
"The transaction snapshots let you find out where the application broke; it pinpoints where in the call stack, and then how long it took to resolve."
"The most valuable feature of AppDynamics is that you can easily determine the load on the application."
"In AppDynamics, everywhere I go, there's some sort of grouping and aggregation function, or there's some sort of timeline that lets me zero in more quickly on the traces that I need. They go to more pains to aggregate and bubble the important ones to the top. That removes a lot of manual work."
"It is a move-in powerful feature compared to other market-leading tools."
"Azure Monitor gives us the observability to check everything that we have in the cloud."
"I am monitoring all of my Azure Monitor and getting good reports. I can customize the reports to get the information I need. I am also getting emails about which AAS instances are down and everything in the system related to my services. It is easy to use, scalable, and user-friendly. Microsoft has Many guides and videos to help you understand how to create and use Azure Monitor."
"Among the valuable features of this solution, Application Insights stands out as one of the most significant. It provides insights into application performance and helps identify issues and bottlenecks."
"The solution works well overall. It's easy to implement and simple to use."
"Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment."
"The dashboard allows us to easily track various metrics and quickly understand the overall health of our system."
"Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs."
"The AppDynamics installation process needs to be more straightforward. Deploying the product is also tricky."
"The network diagnostics that they are adding will be really useful. They could add more detail into what is going on in the network."
"AppDynamics's agent management could be improved."
"AppDynamics could benefit from greater integration with emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning."
"The integration part in AppDynamics with other systems is an area with a little difficulty, especially when it comes to the configuration area. The integration of AppDynamics with other products takes a lot of time."
"SQL statement monitoring"
"AppDynamics' modules and hardware resources are very high."
"There are many KPIs that are not available in AppDynamics."
"Azure Monitor's integration with applications could be improved."
"Enhancing and reaching a level of detail that facilitates pinpointing and addressing issues at such a refined level within the application and database components would be helpful."
"In my opinion, they should improve the overall user experience, especially when it comes to indexing and searching collective logs."
"We encounter some difficulties in monitoring the operating system on its own."
"The query builder could be better. In comparison to other monitoring tools, in order to use Azure Monitor, your engineers need to have KQL experience. If they don't, it's not intuitive as a system."
"I'd like the solution to do more around vulnerability assessment. It's lacking in the product right now."
"The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics."
"The scalability could be improved as there are some limitations."
AppDynamics is ranked 5th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 155 reviews while Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews. AppDynamics is rated 8.2, while Azure Monitor is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AppDynamics writes "Very good real-time monitoring capabilities, deep problem diagnosis, and transaction mapping". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". AppDynamics is most compared with Dynatrace, Elastic Observability, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and Instana Dynamic APM, whereas Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver). See our AppDynamics vs. Azure Monitor 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.
