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

Azure Monitor vs OpenText Real User Monitoring comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

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

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (4th)
OpenText Real User Monitoring
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
42nd
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 March 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 2.9%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Real User Monitoring is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Monitor2.9%
OpenText Real User Monitoring0.7%
Other96.4%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Andy Rabern - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Telemetry insights have improved how I track user behavior and application performance daily
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it does well. My perspective is more based on an Application Insights agent running on a service or an app service and sending the telemetry via the agent, and also doing the filtering of telemetry at the agent level so you are not having a ton of telemetry. I believe Azure Monitor does pretty much the same thing. I have also used tools such as New Relic, and New Relic is a much more robust tool, but that is a different product and you are going to pay for that. It is a different offering altogether. The subscription that we had at the time allowed for a couple gigabytes of telemetry during the month, and I believe that telemetry only lives for about two months. You have to experiment with it to see how much you want to pay. I was not really involved in the pricing. It was more along the lines of we were running up against our limits in terms of the amount of free telemetry or telemetry that we get with our subscription, and so we either needed to scale back or turn specific telemetry types off or do some more sampling. It is nice that those capabilities are there so that you can reduce the amount of telemetry. I cannot really speak to pricing but I do believe that it is somewhat reasonable for Azure Monitor. New Relic is pretty expensive, I believe.
YA
Sr. Solution Architect, Project Manager at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
User-level monitoring with near-real-time analytics boosts service availability
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, from a user perspective The functions that Real User Monitor is intended for, which is to provide the…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"From a business standpoint, I think the ability to see where your users are is valuable."
"The most valuable features of Azure Monitor are the login analytics workspace and we can write any kind of custom queries in order to receive the data that is inserted into the login analytics workspace, diagnostic settings, et cetera."
"The most valuable feature is the universality of their functionalities in all Azure services, including, software solutions."
"In the last company where I worked about a year ago, it looked very simple."
"The most valuable feature is that it's stable. It hasn't crossed any thresholds."
"I am monitoring all of my Azure Monitor and getting good reports. I can customize the reports to get the information I need. I am also getting emails about which AAS instances are down and everything in the system related to my services. It is easy to use, scalable, and user-friendly. Microsoft has Many guides and videos to help you understand how to create and use Azure Monitor."
"Provides an overview and high-level information."
"Data exporting is easy, and this tool works seamlessly with other solutions. It's a stable and low-priced solution."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"Very easy to implement."
"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."
"It is a good product."
"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 technical support is good at resolving issues."
"Real User Monitoring tools help proactively identify problems before they become critical by monitoring thresholds. There is a threshold and an SOA threshold."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
 

Cons

"This solution has fewer features than some of its competitors, so adding more features to it would make it better."
"Azure Monitor's integration with applications could be improved."
"If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill."
"Integration with third-party tools from other vendors than Azure is more time-consuming"
"No improvements are needed from my perspective."
"If I contact the First Line Support, they seem disconnected and lack technical information."
"Azure Monitor could improve network performance monitoring and make it more advanced."
"I'd like the solution to do more around vulnerability assessment. It's lacking in the product right now."
"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."
"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."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"The solution's technical support presents a lot of issues with too many delays."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"The diagnostics perspective, particularly in terms of the root cause analysis of failures, should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's a costly solution"
"Customers of Azure Monitor must pay an amount that depends largely on how many services they need to integrate and the storage space required in terms of logs, etc. If they only have a few small services to monitor, the price won't be too high, but on the opposite side of the spectrum, it can certainly get pricey."
"Regarding pricing, Azure Monitor is free with Azure license, so there are no additional costs for using it."
"Besides standard licensing fees the customer needs to additionally pay based on the ingested data size"
"The solution is a pay-as-you-go consumption service and is the least expensive in the market."
"Its cost depends on the ingestion of the logs. It could go anywhere. For an out-of-the-box platform such as FrameFlow, you pay pretty much a fixed price and you get what you get, whereas, with something like Azure Monitor, you pay by the ingestion charge, so you can have one client who pays hardly anything for the same alerts, and another client pays loads and loads."
"Azure Monitor is one of the more cost effective solutions on the market."
"Azure Monitor is a competitively priced solution."
"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.
883,896 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What do you like most about Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment.
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it...
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

No data available
Micro Focus Real User Monitor, Micro Focus RUM, HPE RUM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Avea, Maccabi Healthcare Services, TEB
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
883,896 professionals have used our research since 2012.