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

Loom Systems vs Splunk AppDynamics comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 17, 2025

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

Loom Systems
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
63rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Anomaly Detection Tools (2nd)
Splunk AppDynamics
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
253
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (3rd), IT Operations Analytics (2nd), Mobile APM (1st), Container Monitoring (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Loom Systems is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Splunk AppDynamics is 2.8%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Splunk AppDynamics2.8%
Loom Systems0.3%
Other96.9%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

Keerthi Kumar Sangaraju - PeerSpot reviewer
Stable, easy to set up, flexible, and has multiple functionalities, but needs to define priority levels for each incident
What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority.
Gyanesh Rahatekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Application performance management and error resolution improved with data-driven insights
Dynatrace has multiple functions compared to Splunk AppDynamics, so Splunk AppDynamics should add those functions, which are not available as of now. Dynatrace has a universal agent that collects all information related to their CI, and if one CI has multiple languages, then there is no need to instrument multiple agents. However, Splunk AppDynamics requires multiple agents; if I have one server with multiple applications in different languages, then I need to instrument different agents for each application. Splunk AppDynamics should work with Dynatrace with one single universal agent that works with all application languages, eliminating the need for multiple implementations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."
"We have found the scalability to be quite good."
"The metrics browser is very useful, and the deep dive feature is very useful for us."
"The most valuable features of AppDynamics is the scalability and monitoring."
"Users can configure business sections in their environment, and it's possible for customers to configure different sources for the name of the class, the name of the method, or the name of the web service, which is very interesting."
"In my experience, it's easy to use. There's nothing complex to learn or fear. You can quickly adapt to it without the need for extensive training."
"The SAP monitoring element is very helpful."
"The most valuable feature of AppDynamics is that we can see all query times. If a particular query is taking too much time, we can alert it."
"Provides good overall application performance and transaction errors."
 

Cons

"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"The application end of AppDynamics Database Monitoring needs to improve by checking which applications consume licenses."
"AppDynamics Database Monitoring would be improved with more support for microservices architecture."
"They are using Flash for their website, which is very slow. We had hoped the website would be much faster to use, and that is definitely what we want to see."
"I would like to see accommodation for millisecond granularity, as we only have one-second granularity now."
"We have had downtime, which has been the result of config, application, or cord issues."
"They do not have robust documentation."
"More native support for other hardware is needed because having to install various extensions and perform extra setup for different devices is really challenging, and not as easy or straightforward as it is in other products."
"I install it frequently and sometimes when they fix something they break something else, so better QA is needed to ensure the quality of their fixes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"My understanding is that the price of this solution is quite high, compared to other products."
"It does require licensing to be paid."
"AppDynamics Database Monitoring is expensive. I rate it a seven to eight out of ten."
"The licensing scheme is very complex. They need to make it easier."
"I give the price a five out of ten."
"There is a license to use this solution. However, the clients pay for the licenses we are the service provider."
"There is an annual cost for the use of this solution."
"The pricing is very competitive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
869,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business55
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise188
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Any advice about APM solutions?
There are many factors and we know little about your requirements (size of org, technology stack, management systems, the scope of implementation). Our goal was to consolidate APM and infra monitor...
APM tools for a Managed Service Provider - Dynatrace vs. AppDynamics vs. Aternity vs. Ruxit
Hi Avi! It's great to see your thorough approach to selecting an APM package for your MSP company. Considering your focus on SMBs and enterprises in Israel, Dynatrace seems like a solid choice with...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Citrix, Amdocs, Sysaid, Hexaware, Effibar, Revtrak, Taptica
Cisco, Sony, Nasdaq, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, Edmunds.com, Puma, Fox News, DirecTV, Pizza Hut, T-Systems, Cornell University, OpenTable, BITMARCK, Green Mountain Power, Care.com, Overstock, Paddy Power, eHarmony, Kraft, The Motley Fool, The Container Store, and more See more customers
Find out what your peers are saying about Loom Systems vs. Splunk AppDynamics and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.