We performed a comparison between IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and New Relic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability."IBM's main value lies in its integration with its own technologies, which can be seen as a benefit in environments where IBM products are extensively used."
"The solution is very stable. We never had any issues with stability."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to manage the application flow."
"They have baseline level alerting."
"It has helped us maintain a much higher uptime than we had previously."
"The synthetic alert is the most valuable feature in New Relic APM. I also like the time travel feature and find traceability useful in the solution. New Relic APM also has good response times."
"They instrument up from the bottom to the top – every piece of code - they have a very perfect read of what’s being done, and how long it’s taking."
"The most valuable feature is the New Relic APM module to deep-dive into the application, to get bottlenecks to the surface, and to improve application performance. Also, the New Relic Insights module creates a real-time dashboard on application performance to create awareness for the DevOps team."
"The monitoring so far has been good and we are happy with it."
"It has in-depth analysis using developer code for someone whose not traditionally a developer."
"The user interface was not good."
"The installation process is difficult, requiring continuous support and specialist expertise due to our limited knowledge of managing it effectively."
"Compared to their competitors, they are missing some features at the moment."
"They need to improve the alerting and dashboarding as these are the key features in DevOps."
"New Relic APM could improve error debugging and the correlation with the logs. We are receiving some alerts or alarms but we need to correlate with the error log, but it is difficult if it is more than seven months retention period, it is hard to trace. We need this especially for getting historical information."
"The initial setup can be made easier. Like Mixpanel, New Relic can also have a step-by-step guide for the setup process."
"New Relic APM can improve the information when we dig deeper to check a problem. There should be more detailed information provided."
"The solution only supports the cloud platform and not on-premises."
"In addition, its difficult to have a predictive tool to see how the application would behave in the future when it basically only shows the historical data."
"How granular I could go down at looking at certain data, especially related to the operations, is limited."
More IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is ranked 53rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 2 reviews while New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 151 reviews. IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is rated 6.6, while New Relic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager writes "Integrates well with IBM technologies, but it's outdated and lacks essential features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of New Relic writes "Has a simple user interface and end-to-end monitoring and self-healing features". IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is most compared with Dynatrace, IBM Application Performance Management, Azure Monitor and ITRS Geneos, whereas New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Azure Monitor.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.