We performed a comparison between ManageEngine Applications Manager and New Relic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"ManageEngine Applications Manager maintains the historical data and it's easy for us to analyze the trends and patterns and fix them accordingly."
"The initial setup was straightforward, without complexity."
"ITSM is a valuable feature, it complies with the requirements in Pakistan."
"Its price and the flexibility to deploy are the most valuable. Flexibility is very important, and you can scale from very basic to more complex. This solution is a part of a complete suite of management tools. So, it can be integrated with other solutions for monitoring networks, which is very important. You can expand it or interconnect it with many other tools, which is a powerful feature. We have a very good and long relationship with ManageEngine support guys. They provide very good support for us."
"What I like most about ManageEngine Applications Manager is its price point, apart from its technicalities. The solution is cheaper than its competitors. ManageEngine Applications Manager has helpful documentation that makes setting it up straightforward."
"I am impressed with the tool's reporting feature which is simple."
"The feature that I have found most valuable in ManageEngine Applications Manager is its dashboard."
"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 product allows the developer to see the actual problems in the applications."
"New Relic has helped us in terms of the optimizing our print and loading times."
"The solution is quite stable."
"The versatility of the solution is its most valuable feature."
"The alert mechanism is quite accurate when something goes wrong in your system. For example, if you have hundreds of APIs on your server, and any of the APIs is not performing well, you get an alert. When there is a drop or change in the threshold value, the beauty of New Relic is that within a fraction of seconds, all the stakeholders who are configured in the New Relic system will get an alert. That's one good thing."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It is easy to track and easy to follow."
"We like the performance of the product."
"The problem is that implementation requires a significant amount of mapping effort."
"I would like the solution to improve the ability to track services."
"They can improve the post-processing of the data. AppDynamics has more powerful tools for post-processing or analytics. It has some limitations in more complex environments, but because we are free to use different solutions, we try to find what is best for the customers or the problem we are trying to solve."
"The dashboards in the interface need a lot of work."
"An area for improvement in ManageEngine Applications Manager is artificial intelligence. If AI is integrated into the solution, it'll be a piece of cake. Currently, it's all configured manually."
"The information provided by ManageEngine is not deep-dive like IBM and CA provide."
"The agent often crashes when there is too much load on the application side. If a sudden storm of data comes in, the agent crashes down most of the time."
"One area of improvement is the dashboard should be more readable and available."
"They could improve the education process and how people understand that these tools are very technical. Right now, if someone was to pick it up from day one, it is a very steep learning curve."
"The APIs could be better. I would also like more APIs and features to integrate with streaming solutions, like Kinesis or Kafka."
"Some AIOps are missing in New Relic APS, and I would like to see more features in this area."
"We have had issues with our agents going offline."
"The solution must provide better support for Azure Web Apps service."
"The UX/UI design of New Relic APM could be improved. The solution currently has some slow pages in terms of loading and viewing the pages, for example, the reports. The reports and other pages take a long time to load."
"We would like to receive more AWS-specific details from the New Relic Dashboard, like EC2 health."
"The solution should include more detailed reports for SQL database requests."
More ManageEngine Applications Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine Applications Manager is ranked 34th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 15 reviews while New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 151 reviews. ManageEngine Applications Manager is rated 7.6, while New Relic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of ManageEngine Applications Manager writes "Though it is a useful tool for the modernization and monitoring of applications, it lacks in providing stability and scalability". 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". ManageEngine Applications Manager is most compared with AppDynamics, Dynatrace, Grafana, SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor and Azure Monitor, whereas New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Azure Monitor. See our ManageEngine Applications Manager vs. New Relic report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.