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

Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs OpenText Real User Monitoring comparison

Broadcom and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category. Broadcom is ranked #49 with an average rating of 7.0, while OpenText is ranked #43 with an average rating of 7.7. Broadcom holds a 0.0% mindshare in APM, compared to OpenText’s 0.2% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 58% of OpenText users who would recommend it.
OpenText Real User Monitoring
Read 11 OpenText Real User Monitoring reviews
  • 441 Views
  • 309 Comparison Views
58% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

OpenText Real User Monitoring and Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management compete in the enterprise application performance monitoring market. Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management holds the upper hand due to its better features, according to user reviews, despite challenges with pricing and support.

What features are offered by OpenText Real User Monitoring in comparison to Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?

OpenText Real User Monitoring provides real-time user monitoring and in-depth analytics but lacks the comprehensive application tracing and extensive customization options of Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management. Users highlight superior functionality and feature breadth in Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management.

What areas of improvement can be found in OpenText Real User Monitoring in comparison to Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?

OpenText Real User Monitoring users suggest improvement in reporting capabilities and quicker response times. Suggestions for Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management include making the setup process more user-friendly and offering better integration support. Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management has fewer areas needing improvement and appears more refined overall.

How is the ease of deployment and customer service of OpenText Real User Monitoring in comparison to Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?

OpenText Real User Monitoring is straightforward to deploy but has mixed reviews regarding customer service. Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management, while noted for a more complex deployment process, receives higher praise for its responsive and supportive customer service.

What setup costs and ROI can be seen with OpenText Real User Monitoring in comparison to Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?

OpenText Real User Monitoring is praised for its cost-effectiveness and decent ROI. Users of Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management feel that despite higher costs and setup expenses, the ROI is justified by the advanced features and performance benefits, indicating a preference for long-term value.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring Report (Updated: April 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring
April 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 848,253 peers since 2012

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

Cross-Enterprise Applicatio...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
49th
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Real User Monitoring
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
43rd
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management is 0.0%, down from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Real User Monitoring is 0.2%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Mohammed Shahpoup - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers a great reporting experience, with much customization and flexibility in extracting reports but it can be more user-friendly
My experience indicates that it needs enhancements in the UI. We are in 2024, and the GUI doesn't meet current expectations for user interfaces or Excel integration. Mainly, CA Service Desk has such a bad user interface. All features and systems, like servers, should have a modern graphical user interface, but CA Service Desk remains classic and still uses a desktop-based interface. It doesn't add features easily; if you need additional functionality, you have to go through many steps. Competitors like ServiceNow, Micro Focus SMAX, and ManageEngine all have better user interfaces. This is the main solution that needs improvement. I am very satisfied with the modeling systems, the grid, and the existing features, except for the graphical user interface.
Read full review
Aphiwat Leetavorn. - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers back-end monitoring, so it can analyze user experience but when customers change the software or version, this tool is quite sensitive
Real User Monitoring tools help proactively identify problems before they become critical by monitoring thresholds. There is a threshold and an SOA threshold. For example, it starts to go yellow, and if it becomes red, the system will crash. When it starts to become yellow (Threshold Approaching), we have to resolve it. This is the same case where we'll know what happened before it's too late. So we can make an early decision to prevent it, maybe by kicking some users off the system before it crashes.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The technical support and documentation are quite good."
"All solutions from Broadcom are very easy to install."
"Very easy to implement."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"It is a good product."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"It offers near-real-time analytics, which is helpful."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"The Real User Monitor, with its transaction and synthetic transaction monitoring, is the typical classic in APM cases when the customer would like to do transaction monitoring. Micro Focus scores better where the underlying infrastructure management is also covered by Micro Focus tools."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring pros
 

Cons

"The UI could be better. When I look at the dashboard, for example, the information looks cluttered and unorganized."
"They lack support and presence in Egypt."
"The diagnostics perspective, particularly in terms of the root cause analysis of failures, should be improved."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
"Real User Monitor needs to cover more protocols to provide more in-depth information. It could also be better at monitoring voice-related traffic. There is currently no visibility in that channel."
"Everybody is moving away from traffic and installing agents on the application to do the job, but Micro Focus is using traditional ways to collect the traffic. They should change their architecture completely."
"Some issues with login errors."
"Customer support needs to improve by bringing in more people who are knowledgeable about the tool, as there are very few left."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, with ten being expensive. So, it is rather cheap."
"If I compare with other vendors, other vendors are more expensive"
"Not expensive."
"The price is approximately €30,000 ($35,500 USD) for the enterprise edition."
"Compared to other tools, OpenText Real User Monitoring is an expensive solution."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
28%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?
I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, with ten being expensive. So, it is rather cheap. On a yearly basis, we pay $400,000. It is fixed, but it differs from year to year because we can add m...
See all answers
What needs improvement with Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?
My experience indicates that it needs enhancements in the UI. We are in 2024, and the GUI doesn't meet current expectations for user interfaces or Excel integration. Mainly, CA Service Desk has suc...
See all answers
What is your primary use case for Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?
At our bank, we have two teams: * one for Network Operations Center (NOC) and * another for administration and innovation. I am the technical lead in administration. For daily basis, the NOC team u...
See all answers
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Real User Monitor?
The diagnostics perspective, particularly in terms of the root cause analysis of failures, should be improved. There needs to be more development in this area, as the support and the number of peop...
See all answers
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Real User Monitor?
The use case is about user-level monitoring and the availability of a service for a user. It's about whether the service is available, its performance, and the type of errors a user is receiving, f...
See all answers
What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus Real User Monitor?
I rate the solution as nine. It is a good product. Everyone should have it as it is essential today, but choose the vendor accordingly. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

No data available
OpenText SiteScope vs OpenText Real User Monitoring Logo
OpenText SiteScope vs OpenText Real User Monitoring
Compared 100% of the time
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
April 2025
Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management reportDownload Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management product report
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Real User Monitoring
March 2025
OpenText Real User Monitoring reportDownload OpenText Real User Monitoring product report
 

Also Known As

CA Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management
Micro Focus Real User Monitor, Micro Focus RUM, HPE RUM
 

Overview

CA Cross-Enterprise APM provides 24/7 monitoring of business transactions for complex application environments by monitoring the real-time performance of mainframe subsystems and providing CA Application Performance Management with this data on a single pane of glass.

Broadcom

Real User Monitoring (RUM) an End user monitoring that gives you visibility into user behavior for fast, targeted problem resolution. It monitors the performance and availability of business-critical application services for all users at all locations all the time. It automatically discovers underlying infrastructure and classifies user actions - giving you instant visibility into session and whole service health over web, cloud, and mobile user experience. It allows you to trace user experience across tiers, capture live sessions, see where customers clicked, measure response times, and see pages that caused problems. And you can easily capture and replay user sessions to create test scripts that reflect real user behavior. All this data gives you new ability to analyze which application transactions your users are performing and what application response they are experiencing. RUM currently supports over 20 application protocols and applications such as SAP, Citrix, and native mobile application monitoring on Android.

OpenText
 

Sample Customers

NIIT Technologies, Cetip Safeguards
Avea, Maccabi Healthcare Services, TEB
Buyer's Guide
Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring
April 2025
Free Report: Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring
Find out what your peers are saying about Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring report.

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.