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

Azure Monitor vs IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (5th)
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
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 9.7%, up from 9.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is 0.2%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Swapan Biswas - PeerSpot reviewer
A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement
Alerts cannot be configured to monitor at a certain point in time. For example, we might want to alert people at zero hours but that is not possible. Splunk can accomplish this and its alerts are far better than the solution's options. The alerting mechanism is not up to the market. The default interface should be improved. You can prepare your own dashboard by using custom query language, but the default interface is not good.
CC
Integrates well with IBM technologies, but it's outdated and lacks essential features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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the universality of their functionalities in all Azure services, including, software solutions."
"The most valuable feature is that it's stable. It hasn't crossed any thresholds."
"Recently, they have improved their integration with other resources, so we get even more robust data."
"Azure Monitor gives us the observability to check everything that we have in the cloud."
"The solution is quite stable."
"The solution works well overall. It's easy to implement and simple to use."
"You can scale the product."
"It's a service from Microsoft, so it will scale."
"The solution is very stable. We never had any issues with stability."
"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."
 

Cons

"They can simplify the overall complexity since you have multiple data sources in the cloud for monitoring. It's quite simple, but there are so many portals. It takes time to work with it. If they could simplify the user configuration, that would be good."
"Azure Monitor could improve network performance monitoring and make it more advanced."
"In terms of pricing, Azure Monitor's billing based on data size can sometimes lead to increased costs, especially when developers need to purge data frequently. While there are mechanisms in place to track and manage this, there is room for improvement in terms of optimizing data pausing and related processes. Enhancements in this area could help mitigate potential billing concerns and provide a more seamless experience for users."
"There are a lot of things that take more time to do, such as charting, alerting, and correlation of data, and things like that. Azure Monitor doesn't tell you why something happened. It just tells you that it happened. It should also have some type of AI. Environments and applications are becoming more and more complex every day with hundreds or thousands of microservices. Therefore, having to do a lot of the stuff manually takes a lot of time, and on top of that, troubleshooting issues takes a lot of time. The traditional method of troubleshooting doesn't really work for or apply to this environment we're in. So, having an AI-based system and the ability to automate deployments of your monitoring and configurations makes it much easier."
"It might not have all of the capabilities we will need."
"Using Azure Monitor and Azure Arc separately to monitor different environments can be complicated."
"have used multiple products like Webex and PRTG. Some features could be added. Azure Monitor should add SMS and APIs. We have very limited access to Azure Monitor. I usually get alerts on my phone when they are integrated with Slack. I am not always available, but my team is. Sometimes, I am traveling and don't have access to my email, but I have Slack and other third-party projects that send me instant messages if a sensor goes down."
"They need to work with other cloud providers - not just Azure."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Customers of Azure Monitor must pay an amount that depends largely on how many services they need to integrate and the storage space required in terms of logs, etc. If they only have a few small services to monitor, the price won't be too high, but on the opposite side of the spectrum, it can certainly get pricey."
"I would rate Azure Monitor a two out of five for affordability."
"Besides standard licensing fees the customer needs to additionally pay based on the ingested data size"
"The product offers a pay-as-you-go model to users. The charges are to be paid according to the usage of the product."
"The tool's pricing is very good. I could say that Microsoft offers different cost models, which are listed on the product's website."
"The solution’s pricing depends on how much logs it collects."
"Its cost depends on the ingestion of the logs. It could go anywhere. For an out-of-the-box platform such as FrameFlow, you pay pretty much a fixed price and you get what you get, whereas, with something like Azure Monitor, you pay by the ingestion charge, so you can have one client who pays hardly anything for the same alerts, and another client pays loads and loads."
"The solution is very costly because you have to pay for various things such as adding to logs and internet alerts."
"I would rate the pricing a nine to ten. It is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
37%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What do you like most about Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment.
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor could improve by adding capabilities for data observability and integrating more tightly with their data platform components.
What do you like most about IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager?
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.
What needs improvement with IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager?
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...
What advice do you have for others considering IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager?
I would rate IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager a six out of ten. The monitoring tool we currently use is outdated and lacks essential features for monitoring customer experience. We face lim...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tivoli Composite Application Manager
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Michelin Tire Corp
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.