OpenText Real User Monitoring enables effective application performance tracking with end-to-end visibility. It features easy setup and helps organizations identify and resolve issues efficiently.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Real User Monitoring | 0.8% |
| Dynatrace | 5.6% |
| Datadog | 4.9% |
| Other | 88.7% |
| Type | Title | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability | Apr 28, 2026 | Download |
| Product | Reviews, tips, and advice from real users | Apr 28, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Real User Monitoring vs Datadog | Apr 28, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Real User Monitoring vs Dynatrace | Apr 28, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText Real User Monitoring vs Splunk AppDynamics | Apr 28, 2026 | Download |
| Title | Rating | Mindshare | Recommending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Datadog | 4.3 | 4.9% | 97% | 208 interviewsAdd to research |
| Zabbix | 4.2 | 2.1% | 95% | 108 interviewsAdd to research |
OpenText Real User Monitoring requires improvements in user interface, agent-based support, and compatibility with non-Windows environments. It faces challenges with its outdated technology, need for extensive configuration, and integration with other products. The architecture should evolve from traditional traffic collection methods. Issues with customer implementations and monitoring limitations, such as unsupported protocols or voice traffic, need addressing. Enhancements in R&D and diagnostics are needed, along with more efficient and responsive technical support.
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 2 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 3 |
| Large Enterprise | 5 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 34 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 29 |
| Large Enterprise | 21 |
OpenText Real User Monitoring works by providing a single view dashboard that integrates seamlessly with BSM, facilitating application performance monitoring. It is valued for its proactive issue identification via monitoring thresholds and efficient incident resolution. Organizations can leverage its comprehensive tracking capabilities for mobile and website monitoring, yielding near-real-time analytics. However, they may face challenges like an outdated interface and limited support for non-Windows environments. Dependency on additional purchases and traditional data collection methods can be limitations. Modernizing architecture and enhancing protocol support are often desired.
What are the important features?Industries employing OpenText Real User Monitoring often use it for real-time and transaction monitoring by capturing network data to analyze performance from user perspectives. It is particularly useful for assessing availability and providing insights in environments where backend analysis and automation are essential.
OpenText Real User Monitoring was previously known as Micro Focus Real User Monitor, Micro Focus RUM, HPE RUM.
Avea, Maccabi Healthcare Services, TEB
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Sr. Solution Architect, Project Manager at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees | 4.5 | I use OpenText Real User Monitoring for tracking service availability and performance from a user's perspective. While its near-real-time analytics are valuable, improvement is needed in root cause analysis, and support is declining as development has stopped, unlike AppDynamics. |
| CTO at Marco Technology | 3.0 | I use OpenText Real User Monitoring for end-to-end traffic monitoring, though it's complex and requires compatibility improvements. Its proactive threshold alerts help prevent system crashes, offering potential cost reductions. Despite considering other tools, OpenText remains my primary choice. |
| Sr. Solution Architect, Project Manager at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees | 4.0 | We've used Real User Monitor for 10 years, finding it stable, scalable, and productivity-improving. While it offers good ROI and is cost-effective, we need better protocol coverage, especially for voice traffic, and improved customer support. |
| Technical Lead at Bharti AXA Life Insurance | 4.0 | I use OpenText Real User Monitoring for data center and real-time monitoring as well as automation. It helps resolve infrastructure issues efficiently, but technical support is lacking. Although it provides cost savings, I find ServiceNow more accessible and effective. |
| Delivery Manager at AMAN | 4.5 | I use this stable, scalable solution to monitor user application interaction and network performance. It was easy to implement and isn't expensive, though login errors need improvement. I rate it 9/10. |
| IT Specialist at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees | 1.0 | I am very disappointed with this Micro Focus solution, rating it 2/10. It's old, heavy, and a nightmare to deploy and maintain, especially for cloud environments. We are migrating to Dynatrace for a more modern approach. |
| Presales Manager at a tech services company with 51-200 employees | 2.5 | I find Micro Focus Real User Monitor good for tracking user sessions, but its outdated traffic-based approach, cumbersome setup, and scalability issues are major concerns. I rate it 5/10, suggesting significant architectural changes are needed. |
| Unit Manager | Management Systems and Automation at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees | 3.5 | I use Micro Focus Real User Monitor for monitoring; it’s stable, scalable, with good reporting and support. Yet, the older technology and difficult dashboards are concerns. I recommend it with code injection, rating it 7/10. |
