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

Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
26th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
162
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (8th)
IBM Tivoli Composite Applic...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
68th
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 November 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is 1.7%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is 0.7%, up from 0.5% 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 Management1.7%
IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager0.7%
Other97.6%
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.
CC
Sales manager at Prodeo Innovation
Integrates well with IBM technologies, but it's outdated and lacks essential features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

"Introscope helps our application team proactively identify and resolve problems fast."
"Proactive snapshots of transactions and all details of a transaction are saved in case of an error."
"Technical support is excellent; if you opened a support ticket, you would get a reply within a few business hours, and they call back and make themselves available."
"CA APM gives us more transparency about our website environment and reduces time for root-cause analysis and minimizes service downtimes."
"At the end of the day, you should be selecting an APM tool that best suits your organisations requirements when it comes to Performance and Availability Management."
"CA APM is a great product."
"The usability and dashboarding are valuable because that is how our clients see the information, and deep trace analysis is valuable because that is how we figure out where our problems are."
"Experience View provides a business-focused view that answers the key question as to what the customer experience is, with a minimal amount of work required."
"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, and we never had any issues with stability."
 

Cons

"The setup is complex. It takes some reading and understanding of the architecture along with some prior skills."
"We aren't getting the value we imagined out of the product."
"When we made the upgrade to 10.3 we have some problems with the new version."
"Sometimes the workstation hangs or becomes unresponsive. However, the web application works worse, is ugly, and we prefer to use the workstation."
"One of the areas that I think needs improvement is the central management of the agents."
"Upgradability to it is a project instead of a patch. If it was actually an automated process to where it just fed updates to our product that would be great. Now, we have to spin up an effort to actually upgrade the solution."
"There are a lot of improvements to be done."
"CA Introscope has performance and data collection issues."
"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

"Althougth it is a bit expensive, it is really worth 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."
"It is definitely expensive for what we get, but there isn't an alternate option at the moment."
"Pricing and licensing are not issues."
"Depends on the size of the product you need."
"Broadcom is a better and cheaper option from the financial perspective. It also depends on the DLP plug."
"On pricing, CA is very competitive. I think that's going to help in the long run."
"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."
"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.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise122
No data available
 

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
Tivoli Composite Application Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lexmark, Intermountain Healthcare, National Australia Bank, BBVA Compass Bank, Innovapost, Dansk Supermarked Group, U.S. Cellular, Orange, Cetip
Michelin Tire Corp
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs. IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.