We performed a comparison between Dynatrace and OpenText Real User 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."We are able to fix issues rather quickly, by identifying then fixing them. Therefore, the efficiency of the organization has improved. We are spending less time fixing issues."
"Google says is that you have a number of things on which you should measure your performance. One is if there's an error or not. Dynatrace tells you whether is an error or not. Second is saturation, whether something is getting saturated. You should be aware of what is getting saturated. Dynatrace even tells you that. The third is if there is a latency. Network latency is also told to me by Dynatrace."
"It has helped us by reducing the number of incidents that we have had in the past."
"We had a very quick turnaround, and it solved our problems. We get more insights into what our code is doing, where the bottlenecks are. The tool helps us to find the root cause much faster than other tools in the market. Our team can then work with the engineering team to fix the problems at a much faster rate."
"In the AppMon, offering, currently, the most valuable feature is the PurePath analysis, being able to deep-dive into call chains."
"It prevents (together with performance testing) production performance issues which usually result in customer complaints or system downtime."
"Dynatrace improved the resolution of problems by making it easier to find root causes and easier to predict bad system behaviour."
"The monitoring is very good."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The most useful feature of this solution is tracking. When the application's traffic has been monitored it is taken from that particular application and analyzed. It is then given a live session of that particular user. For example, if you are using your bank application to do some kind of transaction, everything that you do can be tracked by that application."
"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."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"Very easy to implement."
"We have a very stringent budget for an infrastructure solution. Maybe if they provided modules, a simple module with fewer features and a lower price, that would be very good."
"The web version of the client interface needs more features that are in the Java-based thick client."
"Its infra monitoring is not that good. They are mainly into the APM environment, such as network monitoring and other things. Strong end-to-end infrastructure monitoring is missing. SNMP monitoring is currently not very good in this solution."
"On the side of the end user experience, I would suggest adding a new service for analyzing the backtrace of users."
"Cloud monitoring and reporting need improvement, as well as how to manipulate data and export it to share with business executives."
"I would like to see AppMon also integrated in the Dynatrace portal. There are certain features, which I am not saying are not there in Dynatrace, but I am used to in AppMon."
"Provide much better alignment between AppMon and Dynatrace."
"I believe that something related to IoT devices should be improved."
"Some issues with login errors."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"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."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"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."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
Dynatrace is ranked 2nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 341 reviews while OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 46th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews. Dynatrace is rated 8.8, while OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2. 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 Real User Monitoring writes "The reports and metrics we collect help us to improve our services". Dynatrace is most compared with Datadog, New Relic, AppDynamics, Splunk Enterprise Security and Azure Monitor, whereas OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with AppDynamics, Honeycomb.io and VMware Aria Operations for Applications. See our Dynatrace vs. OpenText Real User 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.