No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs CA App Synthetic Monitor comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Broadcom DX Application Per...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
28th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
162
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (7th)
CA App Synthetic Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
74th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is 1.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CA App Synthetic Monitor is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management1.6%
CA App Synthetic Monitor0.6%
Other97.8%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

EG
Director of Technical Part at NOS SGPS
Dashboards facilitate prompt alerts but discovery feature needs enhancement
I would recommend Broadcom DX Application Performance Management if a customer doesn't have any existing performance solution. However, ten years ago, the solution was better, and now there are many competitive options. My overall rating would be between six and seven. The product rating I would give is 6.5 out of 10.
reviewer2286675 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
A reliable solution for SSL offloading and to encrypt outside traffic
If you are responsible for monitoring the logs in F5, it isn't very easy. The format is complicated compared to different vendors. For example, Fortinet and Cisco have feasible formats for sending and fetching logs. Suppose I'm monitoring the logs and everything, and when I am retrieving logs from F5, I want to know whether it is regular traffic or any abnormality is happening. The logs itself is not user-friendly. It may not give you a clear way of what's happening. You have to go through different websites and work on it. You have to waste so much time on it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We receive good transactions from it with good graphs, as well, documenting the activities of total visitors on the site. We can pull the reports and provide them to the client, as required."
"The APM tool allows us to monitor performance of that application, where are the pain points, where are the slowdowns, to focus on where we can fix those."
"CA APM is very scalable and used in a clustered environment because it supports more than its technical capacity."
"If you have a large web firm or a group of servers, it does a great job of aggregating performance metrics into single viewable graphs or dashboards."
"Mainly, I think it's the amount of knowledge that it provides to the application team; it's vast."
"APM 10 Team Center provides a faster way to diagnose environmental issues and complements the existing APM WebView."
"The solution has very good capacity and performance analytics, with an excellent dashboard that allows me to get quite granular and provides a lot of insights into how my system is performing and what kind of load is on the systems."
"It has helped us to showcase business use cases better to our clients during demos or PoCs."
"From our experience, it really helps managers in measuring application SLAs and viewing historical performance data."
"Each had strengths in one area or another, but CA covered the majority of our needs end-to-end."
 

Cons

"I have not rated it higher because I’d like more integration and more bells and whistles."
"Outages with the solution are very frequent nowadays actually; we see the APM solution going down two to three times a day, and it’s a long troubleshooting cycle, as the CA APM system seems to add a lot of performance overhead."
"The reason why I am not going to 10 is documentation needs to be centralized."
"If you will ask me about the general Level 1 support of the CA, and I would give them a two or three out of 10 because it takes a long time to get to them to focus on the program."
"Java Console uses too much memory."
"With respect to SQL monitoring, it would be nice to have a little more information because it doesn't provide the full statement all of the time."
"Root cause detection Easy installation and configuration It should facilitate real user monitoring to see what your users are experiencing in real time."
"The front-end representation should match other competitors such as AppDynamics."
"The RBMS component is limited as you can only record using Internet Explorer."
"Pricing makes little sense. We had examples where it would be cheaper to have two basic accounts than one intermediate."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing costs are expensive."
"There is some research needed to determine licensing costs, based on the number of DataPower instances for the Nastel agent, for example."
"The pricing structure should be based on memory or CPU usage rather than the number of agents, as it makes the solution more expensive for us."
"Negotiate a lot, but do not forget to buy the product because it is worth it."
"All discounts are case by case to accommodate the client's budgets."
"It is definitely expensive for what we get, but there isn't an alternate option at the moment."
"Pricing and licensing are not issues."
"On pricing, CA is very competitive. I think that's going to help in the long run."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise124
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Broadcom DX Application Performance Management?
The initial pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions. The challenge arises during annual renewals, as the price increase can be significant, around twenty percent or more, ...
What needs improvement with Broadcom DX Application Performance Management?
The first area for improvement is the discovery feature, which should be enhanced to collect comprehensive information from applications and services. This includes using agents or scripts to gathe...
What is your primary use case for Broadcom DX Application Performance Management?
Our primary use case involves having a large dashboard with significant information for alerts, alarms, and metrics to summarize the state of critical businesses and applications. When an issue ari...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

DX APM, CA APM, CA NetQoS Performance Center, Wily Introscope, CA Wily APM, CA App Experience Analytics, CA AXA
CA ASM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lexmark, Intermountain Healthcare, National Australia Bank, BBVA Compass Bank, Innovapost, Dansk Supermarked Group, U.S. Cellular, Orange, Cetip
Lexmark
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs. CA App Synthetic Monitor and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.