We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and IBM Application Performance Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is quite stable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"You can scale the product."
"I use the solution to monitor the infrastructure and applications."
"Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs."
"We like this searchability and availability of the data."
"The most valuable feature is that it's stable. It hasn't crossed any thresholds."
"Technical support is good and helpful...The initial setup is easy."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is the breakdown that it provides, such as a description of the fields for a particular transaction."
"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."
"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."
"Azure Monitor is not user-friendly, and the interface is not exciting. Switching between the dashboards is not easy."
"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."
"The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics."
"I need connectivity with cost management."
"I would like more transparency when we use the solution with another environment, like on-premises, or on another cloud environment, like AWS or GCP."
"They should include advanced logging on the database level in the Azure pool."
"They need to work on a more hybrid deployment that will allow us to monitor local on-premise deployments and connect to different systems. I would like to see more integration."
"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."
"The stability is not great and should be better."
"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."
"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."
"The demo that was provided to us is not working very well. At times, there are errors."
"Technical support can be slow and needs improvement."
"It's still missing some platforms. For example, if you look to applications itself, it is missing the interface."
More IBM Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 45 reviews while IBM Application Performance Management is ranked 54th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 7 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while IBM Application Performance Management is rated 6.4. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Application Performance Management writes "A multi-functional solution but has poor stability and performance-related issues". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and Grafana, whereas IBM Application Performance Management is most compared with Instana Dynamic APM, Dynatrace, BMC Compuware Strobe, IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and AppDynamics. See our Azure Monitor vs. IBM Application Performance Management 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.