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

Azure Monitor vs IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

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

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (3rd)
IBM Tivoli Composite Applic...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
60th
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 6.0%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is 0.2%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Muhammad Usman Khawar - PeerSpot reviewer
Native integration simplifies monitoring but documentation and cost improvements are needed
The ease of access in Azure is significant since it's native to the platform and easy to integrate. It has no maintenance overhead, and users don't have to navigate to another portal to get their desired result. It's the handiness that it has, rather than the features. The interpretation from the logs and injection requires custom runbooks. While it's complex, many services provide native insights and workbooks. It does the basic job quite efficiently. They added new kinds of metrics with more integrations to send out metrics. They have even added support for third-party tools that can be integrated. Azure Monitor is working on improvements and becoming more mature. Azure Monitor is stable and scalable. Azure Monitor is evolving with new workbooks and dashboards.
CC
Integrates well with IBM technologies, but it's outdated and lacks essential features
Implementing synthetic monitoring for our Internet banking site has been challenging. The installation process is difficult, requiring continuous support and specialist expertise due to our limited knowledge of managing it effectively. I have concerns about the complexity of the tool and the challenges in managing it effectively. The support provided is not satisfactory, and the specialists available lack sufficient training and expertise in using the tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ease of access in Azure is significant since it's native to the platform and easy to integrate."
"Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that."
"Log analytics and log queries are the most valuable features of Azure Monitor."
"The features that are most valuable are the alerting function and also the logging functionality to analyze certain issues using log analytics"
"The dashboard allows us to easily track various metrics and quickly understand the overall health of our system."
"What I like about Azure Monitor is that it performs well."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to focus on delivery and maximizing the performance of applications and services."
"I find the query language in this tool very beneficial, as it allows me to customize some dashboards and create alerts according to my thresholds and metrics."
"The solution is very stable. We never had any issues with stability."
"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."
 

Cons

"Azure Monitor's integration with applications could be improved."
"When something goes down, we want the option to have automation in place to get it back up again as quickly as possible."
"No improvements are needed from my perspective."
"The solution should have cross-connection or cross-communication between tech partners."
"I would like more transparency when we use the solution with another environment, like on-premises, or on another cloud environment, like AWS or GCP."
"The solution needs better monitoring. It requires better log controls."
"Lacks information including details related to where problems lie."
"The biggest one is probably just the user interface. There could be more advanced logging at the database level. They can also improve their query builder to allow you to search for things better, but I last used it about a year ago. They might have already changed a ton of things in the newer versions."
"The installation process is difficult, requiring continuous support and specialist expertise due to our limited knowledge of managing it effectively."
"The user interface was not good."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is a pay-as-you-go consumption service and is the least expensive in the market."
"My company is okay with the current pricing of the solution."
"The product offers a pay-as-you-go model to users. The charges are to be paid according to the usage of the product."
"Since we are using the basic set, it is more cost-effective compared to other third-party APM solutions."
"Customers of Azure Monitor must pay an amount that depends largely on how many services they need to integrate and the storage space required in terms of logs, etc. If they only have a few small services to monitor, the price won't be too high, but on the opposite side of the spectrum, it can certainly get pricey."
"It is a pay-as-you-go model. I find it very cost-effective."
"I would rate Azure Monitor a two out of five for affordability."
"The tool's pricing is very good. I could say that Microsoft offers different cost models, which are listed on the product's website."
"I would rate the pricing a nine to ten. It is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Government
11%
Healthcare Company
7%
Non Profit
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What do you like most about Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment.
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
The primary challenge is the documentation. The major challenge that remains is the costing factor for the logs ingestion. The cost skyrockets once you start using it, and there are complaints that...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tivoli Composite Application Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Michelin Tire Corp
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.