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

Broadcom DX Application Performance Management 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

Broadcom DX Application Per...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
162
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (7th)
OpenText Real User Monitoring
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
45th
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 August 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is 0.6%, up from 0.4% 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

MarioGomez - PeerSpot reviewer
Improve application performance management by deploying easy-to-use dashboards but face challenges with support access
The main areas for improvement include making dashboards and interfaces easier to understand. Our version might be a bit old, and we may need to upgrade it. It is also difficult to access the right person in support, and sometimes incidents need to be escalated, taking several contacts to resolve.
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

"I found the solution's end-to-end analysis and flexibility most valuable."
"The way these tools show the information is very useful. this is a tool that records information from Java and .NET applications, and obtain information about how many times an method has been call in a period of time (usually 30 sec), how many times respond in this span of time or is delayed or stall."
"We are using the on-premise and cloud versions of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management."
"Crash analytics goes down to the level of code you need to check."
"We did the setup for a new datacenter, and that was pretty straightforward."
"If we see something that we need to change or monitor, we can get it scripted pretty quickly."
"The solution is very stable."
"The most valuable feature of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management for me is transaction monitoring. The technical support provided for the solution is also an advantage."
"With the solution, you can easily access any issues in your infrastructure."
"It offers near-real-time analytics, which is helpful."
"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."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"Very easy to implement."
"It is a good product."
"Real User Monitoring tools help proactively identify problems before they become critical by monitoring thresholds. There is a threshold and an SOA threshold."
 

Cons

"The front-end representation should match other competitors such as AppDynamics."
"We need more capabilities to analyze the information that tools collects; for example, using artificial intelligence, or something like that."
"The main areas for improvement include making dashboards and interfaces easier to understand."
"The reports are a key part of APM in my vision because it is through them that we manage to generate the evidence to direct the development team and operational support to address. However, we can not extract the information of the tool through reports. We have needed several times to use screen print screen, CTRL + C and CTRL + V."
"Dashboards need to be improved in order to make them self-explanatory."
"The upgrade was complex. The documentation could have been a little bit better, but other than that, it was okay.​"
"It should be easier to install or set everything up. ​"
"There is no auto flow diagram, and the alert mechanism is not as good when compared to other tools."
"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."
"Customer support needs to improve by bringing in more people who are knowledgeable about the tool, as there are very few left."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"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."
"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."
"The product needs more R&D to make it easier and more compatible with other software."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license for Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is annual. The licensing model could improve because there is not any limit to deploying the agent, there should be some limits on it."
"There is some research needed to determine licensing costs, based on the number of DataPower instances for the Nastel agent, for example."
"Dynatrace is the most expensive of these tools followed by AppDynamics which is "medium-expensive." CA APM is a bit lower in price than either Dynatrace or AppDynanics... In my opinion, if you can afford it, go for AppDynamics instead of CA APM."
"Negotiate a lot, but do not forget to buy the product because it is worth it."
"It is definitely expensive for what we get, but there isn't an alternate option at the moment."
"Althougth it is a bit expensive, it is really worth it"
"On pricing, CA is very competitive. I think that's going to help in the long run."
"Depends on the size of the product you need."
"Not expensive."
"If I compare with other vendors, other vendors are more expensive"
"Compared to other tools, OpenText Real User Monitoring is an expensive solution."
"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.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
8%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Performing Arts
9%
Energy/Utilities Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Broadcom DX Application Performance Management?
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...there is a very easy way to deal with it by adding more servers to the application.
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 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

DX APM, CA APM, CA NetQoS Performance Center, Wily Introscope, CA Wily APM, CA App Experience Analytics, CA AXA
Micro Focus Real User Monitor, Micro Focus RUM, HPE RUM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lexmark, Intermountain Healthcare, National Australia Bank, BBVA Compass Bank, Innovapost, Dansk Supermarked Group, U.S. Cellular, Orange, Cetip
Avea, Maccabi Healthcare Services, TEB
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.