We performed a comparison between Dynatrace and OpenText Business Process Monitoring 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."Dynatrace has an auto-baseline and uses AI to monitor the performance of each API. The response time is related to the baseline."
"Being able to identify the blind spots. Before, we had lots of monitoring, but it was all very manual. You only monitor what you know about. As soon as we put Dynatrace in, it sprung to life, and we identified problems instantly."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It is limitless when it comes down to being able to scale up or even scale back, if we need it to."
"The solution is multi-tenant and based in Big data technology."
"Its AI can tell us when something is wrong, including the impacts and the root cause."
"The PurePaths are valuable because that's where somebody who is a non-developer can figure out where the problem is and send appropriate PurePaths, clean charts, or even the link to the developer. The developer can then look at it and figure out exactly where the problem is, this is the piece of code that took the longest time, and then resolve it."
"We use the Dynatrace AI to assess impact. Because it links to real users, it is generally pretty correct in terms of when it raises an incident. We determine the severity by how many users it is affecting, then we use it as business justification to put a priority on that alert."
"Automates processes and allows reports and statistics to improve the speed at which changes and assets are managed."
"The stability has been very good over the years."
"Two things that can be improved are the licensing and the Business dashboard."
"Under heavyweight, Dynatrace becomes slower when listing PurePaths."
"The container platform could include more value-added features."
"It needs more dashboards like AppMon."
"Its needs to focus more on open source areas, like Apache umbrella products and availability motioning areas."
"One piece that we think that's missing is, there were thread names that were missing in analytical information in the Dynatrace solution, versus the AppMon solution. The AppMon solution gives you that information, and it is very helpful for connecting dots and bringing all the pieces together."
"Cloud monitoring is insufficient. We would prefer Dynatrace to make more partnerships with major cloud applications like Salesforce, C4C, etc."
"Add support for Ruby."
"The solution should offer better integration with other tools from a service management perspective."
"Product documentation is lacking, and sometimes, incorrect. Having better documentation will allow business analysts and data center personnel to rely on the Micro Focus help desk less."
Dynatrace is ranked 2nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 341 reviews while OpenText Business Process Monitoring is ranked 58th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. Dynatrace is rated 8.8, while OpenText Business Process Monitoring is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Dynatrace writes "AI identifies all the components of a response-time issue or failure, hugely benefiting our triage efforts". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Business Process Monitoring writes "Stable with good performance visibility but is a discontinued product". Dynatrace is most compared with Datadog, New Relic, AppDynamics, Splunk Enterprise Security and Azure Monitor, whereas OpenText Business Process Monitoring is most compared with AppDynamics. See our Dynatrace vs. OpenText Business Process Monitoring 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.