We performed a comparison between Apica and Dynatrace 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."It is easy to set up and configure."
"You can tell from the operational space of people who are using and consuming this data that they are more integrated. It is not dependent on one team anymore. It saves a lot of time by capturing and pinpointing the exact problem that is happening quickly. We have moved from getting escalations manually to getting escalations synthetically."
"The GUI is powerful and doesn't require scripting or regular expressions. It has a vast finder for correlation, which is easier than other tools like JMeter and LoadRunner. It's also easy to integrate with other tools with a separate execution environment. The tool is also easy to use."
"With the ZebraTester, the ability to have and store dynamic variables, when setting up the monitors, means you can extract that value and use it in a subsequent service call. This is something that has made our lives easier... This is one of the features that I like the most because it helps us in configuring these services, in a certain flow, without the need to re-record the whole thing."
"Our application SREs do script checks in such a way that closely mimic our customers' actions using the platform. Because there are so many different ways and options to be able to configure checks to closely mirror your applications' capabilities, it provides a lot of optionality for teams to create the right type of check that can notify when there are any issues. At the end of the day, we want our monitoring tools to be able to catch any outage before our customers do. This is where Apica Synthetic does a great job."
"It uses a basic scripting language, which is easy to learn and customize as needed. Compared to LoadRunner, I found writing and customizing code much easier in Apica."
"We see the benefit almost every day. It allows us to be alerted whenever there is a store that is not responding properly around the world. We do have a network operation center (NOC) who receives these alerts, immediately checking if everything is okay."
"One of the biggest advantages of moving to Apica is the ability get to a hybrid model with the architecture in the cloud and our agents on-prem. We also have access to Apica's cloud agent across the globe. That has changed the way that we have our load testing setup at this point. Previously, it was always internal. Now, with this change in the way it is implemented for load testing, we can test anywhere across the globe and from the list of agents available within Apica's cloud. If I don't have an agent available in a second location, it just takes an email to their customer support, then it is spun up within 24 hours. That flexibility has changed the way that we perceive our load tests, not just in the US, but globally."
"We can report and monitor on specific use cases which could not be monitored with SAP or other tooling."
"The most valuable feature is the fact that you can drill down to the code level and get a breadth of information."
"The move valuable feature is the AI engine, which is amazing."
"The solution is amazing, it does well when you need to use it."
"It is really comfortable and easy to use for application monitoring. We are able to see and go deep into the problem. We didn't have any issues with this product."
"Adds value to application owners, DB owners, and provides visibility on how end users utilize browsers and where they are originate from."
"The product installs quickly and immediately. It begins to learn the architecture of the systems which need to be monitored. It then learns what “normal” looks like, so there really is no need for manual configuration."
"You can do deep dive analysis and find root cause quickly."
"The customer service and support were a little slow to respond. The browser sometimes checks alerts on unknown issues like latency from Apica's side."
"When it comes to the way the internal agent is installed, because you can install an application on a server, I would love to see the application Docker-ized. If you could install internal agents using Docker or using containers, it would be easier for us to manage them and spin up internal agents."
"If you are adding any input file, the tool fails to capture the path."
"Apica should add more features and integrations with different tools and certain ticketing systems, like ServiceNow."
"We have been focused on reducing polling times for synthetic checks. We have gone from 10 minutes down to five minutes for a pretty broad swath, but there is some appetite to reduce that further, which could be an improvement."
"Alerting needs improvement. It's a little noisy. It needs some better options. Currently, they have an issue, when you set up a synthetic monitor, you can set up where it's monitoring from, a data center that Apica owns."
"The initial screen on their dashboard could have a bit more data, but this is a small thing. It could have more data, so we do not need to drill down to a screen behind that initial information. I would like them to get a little better on the user interfaces that we need to go into."
"The reporting part that we use for our executives needs a bit more customization capabilities. Right now, you can use only the three main templates for reporting. We would like to be able to customize them."
"Custom reporting is still missing."
"As the product is evolving quickly and product features are added on a monthly basis, a more transparent roadmap would be more than welcome."
"We have had some struggles with scaling. We were on AppMon, and AppMon has its own monolithic drawbacks."
"I would like a testing module focused on quality gates."
"While designing the business dashboard, I encountered various bugs that impacted my work."
"We sometimes have to run plugins on docker containers."
"Waiting for the session replay needs improvement."
"Our primary wish list for RFEs or feature requests are additional integration options with ticketing systems. Although, we are able to work around it, 'ticketing' is not a core function of the product."
Apica is ranked 45th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 6 reviews while Dynatrace is ranked 2nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 341 reviews. Apica is rated 8.2, while Dynatrace is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Apica writes "Offers transcript download feature and easy to set up and configure tests but not very user friendly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Dynatrace writes "AI identifies all the components of a response-time issue or failure, hugely benefiting our triage efforts". Apica is most compared with Datadog, AppDynamics, Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, whereas Dynatrace is most compared with Datadog, New Relic, AppDynamics, Splunk Enterprise Security and Azure Monitor. See our Apica vs. Dynatrace report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Log Management 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.
