We performed a comparison between AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring and Grafana based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Management (APM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It provides a lot of data, so it helps businesses identify their user base."
"The feature we find most valuable, is that the solution creates a unified platform making it really easy to pinpoint a problem, and then drill down into a transaction to resolve the issue."
"We used AppDynamics to identify gaps and bottlenecks in the software."
"We can see the customer's path from their computer to the backend systems."
"The best feature of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that it lets you find errors in synthetic jobs ahead of the users. The solution shows you all front-end metrics. You can also see JavaScript errors and jQuery errors through AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring. You can also do a correlation between the front end and the backend, or from the user to the navigator, to the backend through the solution."
"It has good stability."
"The solution can scale well."
"The best feature was the creation of graphs and trends."
"The most valuable thing was that it had a good visualization tool."
"It gives us the visibility we need. I like that when we add deployment markers or release markers, we know exactly when an issue arises. For instance, if there is an increased usage of CPU, we can link it directly to the deployment that might have caused the issue. It increases productivity and observability. We can now easily tell when a certain issue arises. It's way easier to debug because it can point you to certain things based on these markers, and we can debug easier."
"The most important feature of Grafana is its alarm formatting capability."
"Compatibility with Prometheus databases and the Spring Boot application make it the first choice when moving toward an SRE model."
"There are multiple kinds of models there to create dashboards, which is quite useful."
"While I am not expecting it in the next release, I would want more centralized management of the agent in the platform and better support."
"We would like to be able to easily use this solution to monitor our Java script based browsers, which are currently blocked by the security settings."
"The interface and user experience could be better."
"What could be improved in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for the synthetic jobs or synthetic agents, in particular, you can't do a lot of tests with just one agent. You have to install a lot of agents if you want to do more tests, so this is an area for improvement in the solution. Another area for improvement in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that you're only able to see basic metrics in the absence of server or database visibility. For the SaaS version of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring, my team just downloaded then installed the extension in an application in Azure to see the application on the controller, so if this can be done in the on-premise version of the solution as well, without needing to install the agent on the machine, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring better. Currently, the .NET agent consumes the CPU or memory and clients usually raise this issue with my team, so it would be good if the on-premises version doesn't require agent installation on the machine. Another functionality I'd like to see in the next release of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for it to receive updates from the file config without needing to reset IIS because right now when you do a modification in IIS, you have to restart IIS. When you add a service to the agent config, you have to restart IIS. For the product server, it's not possible to reset IIS after you make changes to the config file, so if this could be improved, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring a better solution."
"They do not have robust documentation."
"We need different kinds of applications in our infrastructure to see information in Grafana."
"It's difficult to see the trends on the graph when the range is too long."
"Its UI features to create charts can also be improved. Some features could have a link to the documentation."
"The look and feel of the charting and graph capabilities in Grafana could improve. If they provided a storyboard type of feature as they have in other solutions, such as PowerBI. The multi-tenanted and stitch metrics features could improve."
"It is limited on the reporting type supported, which is important for managerial-level officers who want reports that are either general or specific."
"The formatting could be better."
"There are not a lot of plugins for financial market monitoring."
"It would be helpful if they simplified the data source."
More AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is ranked 16th in Application Performance Management (APM) with 5 reviews while Grafana is ranked 9th in Application Performance Management (APM) with 28 reviews. AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is rated 8.4, while Grafana is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring writes "End-to-end visibility, feature-rich, but the support could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Grafana writes "Agent-free with great dashboards and an active community". AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is most compared with Elastic Observability, AWS X-Ray, New Relic, Dynatrace and Akamai mPulse, whereas Grafana is most compared with Azure Monitor, Dynatrace, Honeycomb.io, Sentry and New Relic. See our AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring vs. Grafana report.
See our list of best Application Performance Management (APM) vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Management (APM) 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.
