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

Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs Elastic Observability comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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

Cross-Enterprise Applicatio...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
85th
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Elastic Observability
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (15th), Log Management (16th), Container Monitoring (5th), Cloud Monitoring Software (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management is 0.4%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Elastic Observability is 1.7%, down from 5.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Elastic Observability1.7%
Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management0.4%
Other97.9%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Mohammed  Shahpoup - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Deputy Manager, ITSM Architect at ICT Misr
Offers a great reporting experience, with much customization and flexibility in extracting reports but it can be more user-friendly
My experience indicates that it needs enhancements in the UI. We are in 2024, and the GUI doesn't meet current expectations for user interfaces or Excel integration. Mainly, CA Service Desk has such a bad user interface. All features and systems, like servers, should have a modern graphical user interface, but CA Service Desk remains classic and still uses a desktop-based interface. It doesn't add features easily; if you need additional functionality, you have to go through many steps. Competitors like ServiceNow, Micro Focus SMAX, and ManageEngine all have better user interfaces. This is the main solution that needs improvement. I am very satisfied with the modeling systems, the grid, and the existing features, except for the graphical user interface.
Mohammed-Abdelalim - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Vice President at QualityKiosk Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Has provided powerful customization for unique monitoring needs but needs more out-of-the-box capabilities
In my opinion, the best features of Elastic Observability are their flexibility to integrate with other existing systems and the ability to build a unified monitoring tool that can integrate with existing ones and end-to-end user journeys which require a lot of customizations. The greatest feature in Elastic is the ability to customize. This is similar to my comments about customizable dashboards in Elastic because it's visible to the analyst. However, it's very great. Customizing these dashboards can meet the customer's specific use cases and specific stories that they have in their environment, their special environment that doesn't look like other environments. The dashboarding in Elastic is highly customizable to the level of logos. If the customer wants his company logo in the dashboard, it can be done.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The documentation and the technical support are both quite good."
"All solutions from Broadcom are very easy to install."
"It's easy to deploy, and it's very flexible."
"The product has connectors to many services."
"It is scalable and supports multitenancy, which is beneficial for MSPs."
"The ability to ensure that the data is searchable and maintainable is highly valuable for our purposes."
"Elastic provides built-in features for queries and report generation. It's a very good tool for monitoring integration capabilities."
"In addition to the fact that we are more proactive in the detection of incident before they occur, we can on one click see the request path from the customer to the backend."
"All the features that we use, such as monitoring, dashboarding, reporting, the possibility of alerting, and the way we index the data, are important."
"Elastic Observability significantly improves incident response time by providing quick access to logs and data across various sources. For instance, searching for specific keywords in logs spanning over a month from multiple data sources can be completed within seconds."
 

Cons

"They lack support and presence in Egypt."
"The UI could be better. When I look at the dashboard, for example, the information looks cluttered and unorganized."
"There is still a lot of improvement that is needed in terms of stability. We figured out that it was not able to monitor or offer some forms of self-service capabilities."
"I am familiar with Azure Monitor, which I find more user-friendly compared to Elastic, which is a very technical tool."
"The tool's scalability involves a more complex implementation process. It requires careful calculations to determine the number of nodes needed, the specifications of each node, and the configuration of hot, warm, and cold zones for data storage. Additionally, managing log retention policies adds further complexity. The solution's pricing also needs to be cheaper."
"Simplifying the parsing of logs and manual efforts would also be beneficial."
"Elastic Observability could improve asset discovery as the current requirement to push the agent is not ideal."
"The solution needs to use more AI. Once the product onboards AI, users would more effectively be able to track endpoints for specific messages."
"Elastic Observability needs to have better standardization, logging, and schema."
"The price is the only issue in the solution. It can be made better and cheaper."
"The only challenging aspect for new users is often writing the query language."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, with ten being expensive. So, it is rather cheap."
"The product is not that cheap."
"Elastic Observability is cheaper than other similar solutions, such as Dynatrace. Its license calculation is based on various factors like data volume and physical infrastructure, particularly related to RAM capacity."
"Pricing is one of those situations where the more you use it, the more you pay."
"We have been using the open-source version."
"The product’s pricing needs improvement."
"So far, there are just the standard licensing fees. Several of the components are embedded in the license or are even open source. They're even free depending on what you use, which makes it even more appealing to someone that is discussing pricing of the solution."
"There are two types: cloud and SaaS. They charge based on data ingestion, ingest rate, hard retention, and warm retention. I believe it costs around $25,000 annually to ingest 30GB of data daily. That is the SaaS version. There is also a self-managed license where the customer manages their own infrastructure on-prem. In such cases, there are three license tiers that respectively cost $5,000 annually per node, $7,000 per node, and $12,500 per node."
"We will buy a premium license after POC."
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
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?
I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, with ten being expensive. So, it is rather cheap. On a yearly basis, we pay $400,000. It is fixed, but it differs from year to year because we can add m...
What needs improvement with Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?
My experience indicates that it needs enhancements in the UI. We are in 2024, and the GUI doesn't meet current expectations for user interfaces or Excel integration. Mainly, CA Service Desk has suc...
What is your primary use case for Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management?
At our bank, we have two teams: * one for Network Operations Center (NOC) and * another for administration and innovation. I am the technical lead in administration. For daily basis, the NOC team u...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Elastic Observability?
The problem is their licensing model, which is a bit confusing. Many customers struggle to understand their total cost of ownership because Elastic licensing is not dependent on easy, quantifiable ...
What needs improvement with Elastic Observability?
After careful consideration about areas for improvement in Elastic Observability, aspects such as pricing, customization, implementation, and scalability could be improved. As a user of the system,...
What is your primary use case for Elastic Observability?
My use case for Elastic Observability is observability, as we upload our customers' data, including logs, and when there is an issue, we can analyze what went wrong.
 

Also Known As

CA Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NIIT Technologies, Cetip Safeguards
PSCU, Entel, VITAS, Mimecast, Barrett Steel, Butterfield Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Cross-Enterprise Application Performance Management vs. Elastic Observability and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.