We performed a comparison between IBM Application Performance Management and InfoVista 5View NetFlow 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."I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"It's easy to use."
"IBM Application Performance Management helped us increased our response time by 80% and cost 60% less."
"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."
"The initial setup was straightforward and took minimal effort."
"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 most valuable feature is the breakdown that it provides, such as a description of the fields for a particular transaction."
"InfoVista 5View NetFlow allows us to control the application layer and manage API connections, i.e. Facebook logins or whatever other third-party API services we require."
"The stability is not great and should be better."
"It's still missing some platforms. For example, if you look to applications itself, it is missing the interface."
"Technical support can be slow and needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"The demo that was provided to us is not working very well. At times, there are errors."
"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."
"A little bit better documentation on the details is needed because this subject is not easy sometimes to understand, which limits the capability of the software."
More IBM Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM Application Performance Management is ranked 52nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 7 reviews while InfoVista 5View NetFlow is ranked 61st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. IBM Application Performance Management is rated 6.4, while InfoVista 5View NetFlow is rated 0.0. 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 InfoVista 5View NetFlow writes "Great for service discovery and load balancing and enables us to monitor the traffic flow". IBM Application Performance Management is most compared with Instana Dynamic APM, Dynatrace, BMC Compuware Strobe, IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and AppDynamics, whereas InfoVista 5View NetFlow is most compared with Catchpoint.
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.
