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

Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs IBM Application Performance Management 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

Broadcom DX Application Per...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
29th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
162
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (7th)
IBM Application Performance...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
59th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is 1.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Application Performance Management is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management1.4%
IBM Application Performance Management0.6%
Other98.0%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

EG
Director of Technical Part at NOS SGPS
Dashboards facilitate prompt alerts but discovery feature needs enhancement
I would recommend Broadcom DX Application Performance Management if a customer doesn't have any existing performance solution. However, ten years ago, the solution was better, and now there are many competitive options. My overall rating would be between six and seven. The product rating I would give is 6.5 out of 10.
Daniel Tamiru - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager, Database & System Administration at Awash International Bank
A multi-functional solution but has poor stability and performance-related issues
We are using version 4 of IBM Application Performance Management, and it is deployed on-premises. We use it for internet banking and mainly for application performance on-site. For example, if we face performance-related issues in one of our software or managed services, we use this solution to…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It covers from mainframe, all the way to dotcom, for example. CA currently covers Amazon, Microsoft Azure, Office 365 monitoring."
"Introscope helps our application team proactively identify and resolve problems fast."
"The solution is easy to deploy, and we have been working with customers for many years."
"Proactive alerting is one of the key elements of APM and works really well, as the ability to detect problems before they become widespread high severity incidents is critical when you are managing production systems."
"It is a really good, stable, flexible product, but there are no special features when I compare it with the other solutions from the other vendors."
"The CA APM product is great to show you how your business is doing and where improvements can be made."
"The time it takes to track problems in applications is the most valuable return that we have from this solution."
"We are using APM for troubleshooting and because of this product, the delay to solve and to fix issues has been reduced by 40% on average."
"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."
"IBM Application Performance Management helped us increased our response time by 80% and cost 60% less."
"I would recommend this solution to others."
"The initial setup was straightforward and took minimal effort."
"The most valuable feature is the breakdown that it provides, such as a description of the fields for a particular transaction."
"The transaction tracking feature from IBM is the most important feature for us. It is something that provides a terrific value for us and our clients. It has a lot of data sources and agents that are collectors. It is also stable."
"Because we have partnerships with other partners, I can share a bit about what I've noticed with IBM APM compared to other vendor solutions. Specifically, with IBM, the visibility into detailed process information is more tangible. On the OS level, APM displays all processes (or the top 10 processes) that are consuming CPU or resident memory. This is the most important thing that is not always available with other vendors."
"It's easy to use."
 

Cons

"The way the product itself is it allows you to identify a problem area but not exactly tell what the problem is."
"CA Introscope has performance and data collection issues."
"Yes, we encountered issues with scalability inside Team Center, a massive amount of universes, perspectives, applications."
"There are a couple of improvements that could be done on the agent side of APM. The agent stops collecting data if the machine is under stress."
"In order for the tool to be successful, at least in our organization, it will need to have more self-serve features for implementation, instrumentation, and then modification of metric data from the APM."
"The main improvement areas for all three tools in CA APM are licensing, licensing and support."
"There are a lot of improvements to be done."
"We need more capabilities to analyze the information that tools collects; for example, using artificial intelligence, or something like that."
"The stability is not great and should be better."
"The demo that was provided to us is not working very well. At times, there are errors."
"The solution, itself, has a negative impact on the performance of the machine."
"Its web user interface is a little bit old in comparison to other solutions, such as New Relic, and it should be improved. Its scalability and technical support should also be improved. Currently, it is scalable, but only in a vertical way. They provide good technical support, but the initial steps for a new case can be improved to fasten the resolution process."
"The technical support is not really good, I must say."
"They should focus on potentially enhancing the dashboard to make it more contemporary and adding some customization options. Furthermore, there might be room for improvement in the pricing policy."
"It's still missing some platforms. For example, if you look to applications itself, it is missing the interface."
"Technical support can be slow and needs improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is some research needed to determine licensing costs, based on the number of DataPower instances for the Nastel agent, for example."
"The license for Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is annual. The licensing model could improve because there is not any limit to deploying the agent, there should be some limits on it."
"The pricing structure should be based on memory or CPU usage rather than the number of agents, as it makes the solution more expensive for us."
"Dynatrace is the most expensive of these tools followed by AppDynamics which is "medium-expensive." CA APM is a bit lower in price than either Dynatrace or AppDynanics... In my opinion, if you can afford it, go for AppDynamics instead of CA APM."
"The licensing costs are expensive."
"It is definitely expensive for what we get, but there isn't an alternate option at the moment."
"Negotiate a lot, but do not forget to buy the product because it is worth it."
"Setup costs are quite competitive relative to other solutions, and simpler."
"IBM APM is one of the cheaper products on the market, while everything necessary to get started is included in the license."
"As I previously indicated, I initiated the IBM and uncovered all its elements. Consequently, I'm not inclined towards a licensing approach."
"The licensing fees can be paid every six months or on a yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Construction Company
13%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise124
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Broadcom DX Application Performance Management?
The initial pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions. The challenge arises during annual renewals, as the price increase can be significant, around twenty percent or more, ...
What needs improvement with Broadcom DX Application Performance Management?
The first area for improvement is the discovery feature, which should be enhanced to collect comprehensive information from applications and services. This includes using agents or scripts to gathe...
What is your primary use case for Broadcom DX Application Performance Management?
Our primary use case involves having a large dashboard with significant information for alerts, alarms, and metrics to summarize the state of critical businesses and applications. When an issue ari...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

DX APM, CA APM, CA NetQoS Performance Center, Wily Introscope, CA Wily APM, CA App Experience Analytics, CA AXA
IBM APM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lexmark, Intermountain Healthcare, National Australia Bank, BBVA Compass Bank, Innovapost, Dansk Supermarked Group, U.S. Cellular, Orange, Cetip
Mibtree, EatDrinkDeals.com, IT Performance Advisor
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs. IBM Application Performance Management and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.