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

CA App Synthetic Monitor vs Groundcover Observability Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

CA App Synthetic Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
69th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Groundcover Observability P...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
47th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (41st), AI Observability (27th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of CA App Synthetic Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Groundcover Observability Platform is 0.3%. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Groundcover Observability Platform0.3%
CA App Synthetic Monitor0.5%
Other99.2%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Amir Baum - PeerSpot reviewer
Full Stack Developer at Augury Inc.
Monitoring microservices has become streamlined and custom dashboards provide clear bug insights
I cannot think of something specific regarding improvements for Groundcover Observability Platform as it is quite effective, especially compared to my previous experience with a Rapid7 platform, which was considerably worse. I think it would be beneficial to see the body and content of API calls in the traces as a possible improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Groundcover Observability Platform scales effectively with our organization's growth as we add new environments and everything works great, and the migration from our old product went very smoothly, allowing us to deprecate it rather quickly."
"We switched to Groundcover Observability Platform primarily because of the difficult query syntax in our previous solution, and we chose Groundcover for their business model as they don't charge based on log storage, they provide the infrastructure, and from a security perspective, the data stays in-house, which wasn't the case with our previous tool."
"Groundcover Observability Platform has impacted my organization positively as it is the primary way we use observability in our company, so it has a significant impact."
 

Cons

"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."
"I think it would be beneficial to see the body and content of API calls in the traces as a possible improvement."
"I would assess the stability and reliability of Groundcover Observability Platform as an eight out of ten; while I haven't experienced issues personally, I am aware they occasionally encounter some challenges."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
45%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Groundcover Observability Platform?
I recently visited their booth and reported a bug, which they demonstrated and logged. They assured me it would be fixed by tomorrow.Regarding future versions of Groundcover Observability Platform,...
What is your primary use case for Groundcover Observability Platform?
My main use cases for Groundcover Observability Platform ( /products/groundcover-observability-platform-reviews ) are as a monitoring tool for debugging and monitoring. I use it to review logs, che...
What advice do you have for others considering Groundcover Observability Platform?
These issues with Groundcover Observability Platform are quick to fix. We have an SRE person at the company who works with them closely and uses Groundcover constantly. He creates amazing graphs, m...
 

Also Known As

CA ASM
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lexmark
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, Splunk and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.