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

Mezmo vs OpenText Real User Monitoring comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Mezmo
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
76th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (54th), Observability Pipeline Software (5th)
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 Mezmo is 0.1%, up from 0.1% 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

TO
Has vastly increased our ability to reach SLA targets consistently
Scalability could be improved. We are using it through the IBM cloud deployment and on some of the data centers that are very heavily used, there is a significant lag in the event stream, sometimes 10, 15 minutes behind, which makes the RCA impossible. If an event hits but you don't have the information to look at it, then it's tricky. This is probably not an issue of the product itself, but more a deployment issue. There is something on the IBM side that needs some readjustment to make certain these lags don't happen too often. We now use other tools for back-up in that area. But if you really want to do SIEM type work, then that is an aspect that needs some improvement. It's hard to tell if it's the product or the IBM deployment of it. The user interface is really very productive interactively but for an additional feature, it would be nice if we somehow could encapsulate a query or a filter, and communicate or share that among the team so that specific types of actions can be carried out quickly. In particular, when we deal with a customer issue, it may pertain to a particular transaction through the system and each transaction has a unique ID. It would be great if we could query that ID and request all transactions that pertain to a specific ID. For now, we need to find the events, then extract the ID. Once we have that, we can go through the UI to set up the query and filter it to give us a transaction. But it would be really nice if we could simply say, "Here's the ID. Give me all the transactions."
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"LogDNA consolidates all logs into one place, which is super valuable."
"The solution aggregates all event streams, so that if there are any issues, it's all in the same interface."
"With the solution, you can easily access any issues in your infrastructure."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"It offers near-real-time analytics, which is helpful."
"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 most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
 

Cons

"Every once in a while, our IBM cloud operational implementation gets behind. Sometimes, when we have a customer event, we do not get access to the latest logs for about 30 minutes, particularly for the sites that are heavily utilized. This is clearly not good. It is impossible to RCA when you can't look at the logs that pertain to the time period in which the event occurred. It could be more of an operational problem than a feature problem. I don't have visibility about whether it is a LogDNA issue or just an operational issue."
"No ability to encapsulate a query or a filter, and communicate or share that among the team."
"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."
"Customer support needs to improve by bringing in more people who are knowledgeable about the tool, as there are very few left."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
"Some issues with login errors."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"The diagnostics perspective, particularly in terms of the root cause analysis of failures, should be improved."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Compared to other tools, OpenText Real User Monitoring is an expensive solution."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
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

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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...
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...
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.
 

Also Known As

LogDNA
Micro Focus Real User Monitor, Micro Focus RUM, HPE RUM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Instacart, Asics, Lime, Salesforce
Avea, Maccabi Healthcare Services, TEB
Find out what your peers are saying about Mezmo vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.