Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager vs Splunk AppDynamics comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Tivoli Composite Applic...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
59th
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Splunk AppDynamics
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
261
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (6th), IT Operations Analytics (2nd), Mobile APM (1st), Container Monitoring (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Splunk AppDynamics is 3.7%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Splunk AppDynamics3.7%
IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager0.6%
Other95.7%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

CC
Sales manager at Prodeo Innovation
Integrates well with IBM technologies, but it's outdated and lacks essential features
Implementing synthetic monitoring for our Internet banking site has been challenging. The installation process is difficult, requiring continuous support and specialist expertise due to our limited knowledge of managing it effectively. I have concerns about the complexity of the tool and the challenges in managing it effectively. The support provided is not satisfactory, and the specialists available lack sufficient training and expertise in using the tool.
DK
Technology lead at Infosys
Has enabled us to detect issues instantly through alerts and monitor every service from a single dashboard
Splunk requires significantly more improvements compared to Splunk AppDynamics, specifically regarding the licensing aspect. Splunk renews licenses every six months, which is inconvenient. It would be better to have a one-year license to avoid needing to update keys constantly, which can only occur on weekends, making it a burdensome task. Although Splunk is better for certain use cases, Splunk AppDynamics is broader in functionality. Specifically, I want enhancements related to creating dashboards not only for logs or minor services but also for configuration levels, allowing us to check configurations immediately without manually opening the entire code when exceptions arise—a feature I wish to see improved in Splunk, although it may not be necessary for Splunk AppDynamics.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"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 transaction snapshots are the most valuable feature of AppDynamics"
"The flow map is very valuable to us. Before we installed APM, we had no idea how our application looked."
"The analytics are great."
"The business transactions feature has helped us stay current with the trends in traffic, and we were able to separate successful transactions from non-successful transactions, such as transactions with 200 error codes and 500 error codes, which has been very beneficial to us."
"It is used to test customer behavior on a website."
"It is a stable solution that helps address user issues well."
"We can make custom alerts in our system for specific issues like high CPU utilization or application downtime."
"It has improved our organization with its ability to catch issues quickly and fix them."
 

Cons

"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 native support for other hardware is needed because having to install various extensions and perform extra setup for different devices is really challenging, and not as easy or straightforward as it is in other products."
"The application end of AppDynamics Database Monitoring needs to improve by checking which applications consume licenses."
"Additional support for NextGen mobile platforms also needs to be high in the roadmap prioritizations"
"There could log management features included in the product."
"I would like to see a better way to automate actions based on the events generated by the tool."
"There are certain limitations with the agents in the solution"
"The solution's pricing could be improved and made more competitive."
"To improve Splunk AppDynamics, it should migrate seamlessly into observability Splunk, which is called Splunk Observability Cloud."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a nine to ten. It is very expensive."
"My understanding is that the price of this solution is quite high, compared to other products."
"We have a license-based solution. That means you need a license for each server you monitor."
"The licensing scheme is very complex. They need to make it easier."
"There is an annual cost to use this solution. The licensing model could be improved by making it more cost-effective."
"We have two different licensing models for this solution. One of them is the agent based model, which requires payment per agent. The other is an infrastructure based model, where the price is based on the CPU core. For the infrastructure model wholesale level pricing applies. All of the up to date licensing prices for this product are available on the manufacturers website."
"The cost is prohibitive."
"I would say the solution is affordable because it is widely used across financial service sectors."
"We find its pricing reasonable and competitive. After it was acquired by Cisco, we found it acceptable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Government
10%
Healthcare Company
8%
Non Profit
7%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business55
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise196
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Any advice about APM solutions?
There are many factors and we know little about your requirements (size of org, technology stack, management systems, the scope of implementation). Our goal was to consolidate APM and infra monitor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AppDynamics?
I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten. The solution is highly expensive. Our company pays for the solution on a yearly basis, if we don't add new modules or features to the license, we need ...
 

Also Known As

Tivoli Composite Application Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Michelin Tire Corp
Cisco, Sony, Nasdaq, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, Edmunds.com, Puma, Fox News, DirecTV, Pizza Hut, T-Systems, Cornell University, OpenTable, BITMARCK, Green Mountain Power, Care.com, Overstock, Paddy Power, eHarmony, Kraft, The Motley Fool, The Container Store, and more See more customers
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager vs. Splunk AppDynamics and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.