We performed a comparison between AppDynamics and IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability."The most valuable features of AppDynamics is the scalability and monitoring."
"Has helped us to increase customer acquisitions and reduce revenue leakage."
"It has improved my organization because we are able to proactively and reactively look at performance issues."
"Before we moved the code to AppDynamics, we had to compare the agile process and also had to make sure that they're following the standards."
"In 2014 and 2015, AppDynamics was one of the best products on the market."
"Despite dozens of deployments across hundreds of applications- we have yet to see a case where AD is negatively impacting application execution or functionality."
"Being able to install it on-prem and monitor our on-prem infrastructure is important for us... Most of our infrastructure is on-prem. We have highly scalable systems and AppDynamics will help us monitor our load on-prem. Our systems range from simple to the most complex and it gives us the visibility across transactions, in one dashboard."
"It's good for a larger scale deployment such as what my company is working on."
"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."
"The solution is very stable. We never had any issues with stability."
"The network diagnostics that they are adding will be really useful. They could add more detail into what is going on in the network."
"In the current version of AppDynamics, there is a correlated section, where we can see all servers’ performance along with application performance, but network performance is missing."
"The integration with cloud services is still pending with AppDynamics. We would like the product to be serverless."
"If it can be able to intelligently provide all the things we need to look at, from a data point of view, that would be very useful."
"The agent deployment could be simplified by, for example, adding a GUI."
"I would like to see more artificial intelligence and machine learning brought in to monitor the statement and payment sum issues we have."
"The resolution time takes longer than expected."
"I’d like to see better out-of-the-box visual reporting so that we can roll this up to management."
"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 →
AppDynamics is ranked 5th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 153 reviews while IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is ranked 53rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 2 reviews. AppDynamics is rated 8.2, while IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is rated 6.6. 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 IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager writes "Integrates well with IBM technologies, but it's outdated and lacks essential features". AppDynamics is most compared with Dynatrace, Elastic Observability, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and New Relic, whereas IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is most compared with Dynatrace, IBM Application Performance Management and Azure Monitor.
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.