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

Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs Portkey comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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)
Portkey
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
26th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
5
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 Portkey is 0.3%, 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 (%)
Portkey0.3%
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management1.6%
Other98.1%
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.
Shravan Revanna - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at klydo.in
Centralized AI control has standardized our workflows and delivers faster, more reliable features
There are definitely some places where Portkey can be improved. Overall, the experience has been positive, but the first area is analytics and reporting. While the observability feature is excellent, we would like to have richer historical analytics and customizable dashboards. For example, it would be useful to see trends by applications and teams or features over long periods without exporting data to an external BI tool. Another area is governance for large organizations. As AI adoption grows, enterprises need more granular, role-based access control. We would like to see more advanced AI evaluation capability built into the platform itself, including features such as prompt versioning and automated quality scoring and regression testing. Finally, while the platform is supported with multiple providers, we would welcome even more intelligent routing capabilities, such as automatically selecting the best model based on latency, cost, and task complexity using configurable policies. These are not major pain points, but they are enhancements that would make an already strong platform even more valuable for an organization that scales their AI workloads. Documentation and onboarding could be enhanced. Portkey is developer-friendly, but we need more end-to-end references, architecture, and implementation guides for common AI patterns. This would help teams adopt it even faster. I did not give Portkey a perfect score because while it has become a foundational component in our AI stack and solves several operational challenges, I would still like to see deeper analytics, stronger enterprise governance features, and more built-in AI evaluation capabilities, especially for prompt testing, regression analysis, and model benchmarking. I would be comfortable recommending Portkey to any organization that is building multiple AI applications or wants to manage a scalable way to handle LLM providers and produce AI traffic.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Now, different teams can get info even before the system crashes and can take proactive steps and find the exact point to focus their efforts to fix it."
"It should enable you to see the usage and performance of all application dependencies like databases, web services, caching, etc."
"We understand for APM, it has the ability to drill down and do the end-to-end monitoring that we are looking for."
"We had for several applications performance issues and with Introscope we were in many cases able to pin-point the bottlenecks and debrief them to the development organization to improve their applications."
"The CA UIM is a very solid product; we love the simplicity of the robots and the agent installation and upgrading, because you can just do it right at your central station without rebooting the remote workstations or servers."
"At the end of the day, you should be selecting an APM tool that best suits your organisations requirements when it comes to Performance and Availability Management."
"The product helps us to identify code problems very quickly and can also help us identify other problems with the application as it's running, which is significant for us because application failures can impact revenue and customer satisfaction."
"The graphic display that shows the variables in the time is very intuitive and almost everyone is able to obtain useful information."
"Portkey's visualization is excellent, I particularly appreciate the multiple capabilities they have introduced, especially the MCP gateway, which is outstanding, the caching mechanism is very good, and the logs and traceability features are also excellent."
"Portkey definitely provides a solid alternative solution for the agent and large model hosting platforms, and it is very helpful for us to explore the possibilities across the industry rather than staying with a few mainstream options."
"Portkey has significantly improved the organization by streamlining the AI processes being followed."
"Portkey is totally stable; it is one of the best software solutions in the market for this purpose."
"Overall, Portkey has had a huge business impact in terms of cost savings and operational efficiency."
 

Cons

"We can't implement the TIM in our environment because we have issues with a virtualized environment."
"Reporting capabilities require improvements."
"User management for these tools is poor and we have found the EEM product to help with this to be quite flaky."
"I have faced scalability and stability issues. When we needed to monitor a large number of data metrics, then these kinds of issues occur."
"The area of improvement is related to the areas of application onboarding and instrumentation, where the product has certain shortcomings."
"A CA APM agent takes a lot of memory. That is one disadvantage. If you configure CA APM correctly it will still consume around 15 to 20 percent of memory."
"Needs custom dashboards."
"It needs more features, more performance, especially in a huge environment."
"One major problem I see with Portkey is that when I had not yet started any trial, it started to denote that I had exceeded the prompt limit."
"There are definitely some places where Portkey can be improved."
"The main area for improvement is onboarding and trial experience."
"End-to-end traceability is not fully fulfilled. They are only fulfilling about 50 to 60 percent of our end-to-end agent traceability requirements, and the remaining functionality needs to be implemented."
"However, one thing I would like to say is that it could have better documentation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Broadcom is a better and cheaper option from the financial perspective. It also depends on the DLP plug."
"On pricing, CA is very competitive. I think that's going to help in the long run."
"Althougth it is a bit expensive, it is really worth it"
"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."
"I'm unable to give information on Broadcom DX Application Performance Management licensing costs, but all Application Performance Management products have expensive pricing. This means that it's not only Broadcom that's expensive, and it would be an advantage if the cost would be a little bit cheaper."
"Depends on the size of the product you need."
"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."
"Setup costs are quite competitive relative to other solutions, and simpler."
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%
Non Profit
33%
Computer Software Company
13%
Construction Company
10%
Retailer
10%
 

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portkey?
Regarding pricing and licensing, the cost was relatively low because Portkey sits in front of our existing AI infrastructure. From a licensing perspective, I appreciate that the pricing model is pr...
What needs improvement with Portkey?
Portkey does not have an agent registry, which is a feature they should implement in a future release. We need to capture metadata of agents, and this capability is currently missing. End-to-end tr...
What is your primary use case for Portkey?
Our client is completely using AWS products. For AI gateways, we are using Portkey, which is the product we have implemented, and we are leveraging all AWS services for internal application develop...
 

Also Known As

DX APM, CA APM, CA NetQoS Performance Center, Wily Introscope, CA Wily APM, CA App Experience Analytics, CA AXA
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lexmark, Intermountain Healthcare, National Australia Bank, BBVA Compass Bank, Innovapost, Dansk Supermarked Group, U.S. Cellular, Orange, Cetip
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs. Portkey and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.