Skip to main content

Q&A: Ovum Talks About APM

Pete Goldin
APMdigest

In APMdigest's exclusive interview, Michael Azoff, Principal Analyst at Ovum, discusses his discoveries while researching the Ovum Decision Matrix on APM 2014-15.

APM: What are the main changes in the APM market that you have seen since your last APM report?

MA: Log management continues to grow well as it meets demand for swift performance answers with light weight tools. The need for mobile support continues to grow as expected. Vendors are visible on the market that we have not seen at the top level before, offering reduced functionality compared with top solutions but with ease of use, competitive pricing, and enough functionality to keep users happy.

APM: What do you see as the main drivers behind the strong growth of the APM market?

MA: Applications and services are more complex. At the same time those that are consumer facing have users who will drop the app/service/website if it is slow to respond or worse. The competitive nature of the market is placing higher demands on producing high quality and high performance solutions.

APM: What are the most important new APM capabilities that a buyer should look for?

MA: For development support, it has to be source code line level detail if a crash occurs.

For operations, it needs to provide end to end transaction traceability.

Analytics is now a common feature in top end solutions. Some are more sophisticated than others, e.g. offering complex event processing, and this now extends to big data processing.

APM: What key APM capabilities do the vendors still need to work on?

MA: DevOps and continuous delivery will continue to grow in adoption and there is a role for APM to support these approaches. Also the mobile client and server side APM need to be joined up.

Some players are transitioning their solutions to meet the demands of cloud, web, and mobile, in face of new competition that has this built-in from start. The end users now want seamless cloud and on-premise solutions, as well as seamless mobile client and server side APM.

APM: In your report, you mention log management as an emerging category within APM, and you bring it up now as well. Do you see log management as a replacement for traditional APM, or as an additional capability to augment APM?

MA: Log management is sold as a complementary technology, though any organization that is budget constrained will explore log management as a minimal entry to APM. Where in-house development is conducted, then the possibility of adding purpose built logs for use by log management tools can lead to a form of DIY APM.

APM: Where does APM SaaS (Software-as-a-Service) stand currently?

MA: The pattern when speaking to vendors is that APM SaaS is growing in demand from customers and therefore needs to be available today, though there is a sizable on-premise demand from large enterprises and public sector.

APM: Traditionally BMC is seen as one of the "Big Four" leaders in APM. What caused you to put them in the challenger category instead?

MA: Our ranking of BMC is based on how well it performed against a series of metrics in three dimensions: technology, financial, and market execution. So yes, BMC has slipped measured against its peers.

All vendors make decisions about what they want or are capable of bringing to the market. This does make the solution horse race approach not always appropriate for individual customers, as lesser ranked solutions will make a better fit for some customers. This is our advice: consider our shortlist rankings but examine solutions based on your actual needs. We have a spreadsheet where our customers can weight features according to their needs and this will create a custom ranking.

APM: Any predictions about where APM is headed, and how this may impact your next report?

MA: Two vendors which just missed the boat in being included in our analysis are among the new breed solutions and we look forward to including them next time round: AppDynamics and New Relic.

It is good to see the field as active as it is, with new technologies appearing in analytics and new vendors becoming visible at the top end of market.

ABOUT Michael Azoff

Michael Azoff (PhD, MIEEE) has been working as an IT industry analyst since 2003, bringing over 20 years of experience in pure and applied research and consulting in the IT industry.

At Ovum he leads the software development and lifecycle management (SDLM) research and his current focus is on Agile practices in software development, including enterprise Agile transformation initiatives, DevOps, cloud related SDLM, rich Internet applications, and enterprise IT mobile development.

Ovum, an Informa business based in London, provides clients with independent and objective analysis that enables them to make better business and technology decisions. Ovum research draws upon over 400,000 interviews a year with business and technology, telecoms and sourcing decision-makers, giving Ovum and its clients unparalleled insight not only into business requirements but also the technology that organizations must support.

Hot Topic
The Latest
The Latest 10

The Latest

For years, production operations teams have treated alert fatigue as a quality-of-life problem: something that makes on-call rotations miserable but isn't considered a direct contributor to outages. That framing doesn't capture how these systems fail, and we now have data to show why. More importantly, it's now clear alert fatigue is a symptom of a deeper issue: production systems have outgrown the current operational approaches ...

I was on a customer call last fall when an enterprise architect said something I haven't been able to shake. Her team had just spent four months trying to swap one AI vendor for another. The original plan said three weeks. "We didn't switch vendors," she told me. "We rebuilt half our integrations and discovered what we'd actually been depending on." Most enterprise leaders don't expect that to be the experience ...

Ask any senior SRE or platform engineer what keeps them up at night, and the answer probably isn't the monitoring tool — it's the data feeding it. The proliferation of APM, observability, and AIOps platforms has created a telemetry sprawl problem that most teams manage reactively rather than architect proactively. Metrics are going to one platform. Traces routed somewhere else. Logs duplicated across multiple backends because nobody wants to be caught without them when something breaks. Every redundant stream costs money ...

80% of respondents agree that the IT role is shifting from operators to orchestrators, according to the 2026 IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous IT from SolarWinds ...

40% of organizations deploying AI will implement dedicated AI observability tools by 2028 to monitor model performance, bias and outputs, according to Gartner ...

Until AI-powered engineering tools have live visibility of how code behaves at runtime, they cannot be trusted to autonomously ensure reliable systems, according to the State of AI-Powered Engineering Report 2026 report from Lightrun. The report reveals that a major volume of manual work is required when AI-generated code is deployed: 43% of AI-generated code requires manual debugging in production, even after passing QA or staging tests. Furthermore, an average of three manual redeploy cycles are required to verify a single AI-suggested code fix in production ...

Many organizations describe AI as strategic, but they do not manage it strategically. When AI plans are disconnected from strategy, detached from organizational learning, and protected from serious assumptions testing, the problem is no longer technical immaturity; it is a failure of management discipline ... Executives too often tell organizations to "use AI" before they define what AI is supposed to change. The problem deepens in organizations where strategy isn't well articulated in the first place ...

Across the enterprise technology landscape, a quiet crisis is playing out. Organizations have run hundreds, sometimes thousands, of generative AI pilots. Leadership has celebrated the proof of concept (POCs) ... Industry experience points to a sobering reality: only 5-10% of AI POCs that progress to the pilot stage successfully reach scaled production. The remaining 90% fail because the enterprise environment around them was never ready to absorb them, not the AI models ...

Today's modern systems are not what they once were. Organizations now rely on distributed systems, event-driven workflows, hybrid and multi-cloud environments and continuous delivery pipelines. While each adds flexibility, it also introduces new, often invisible failures. Development speed is no longer the primary bottleneck of innovation. Reliability is ...

Seeing is believing, or in this case, seeing is understanding, according to New Relic's 2025 Observability Forecast for Retail and eCommerce report. Retailers who want to provide exceptional customer experiences while improving IT operations efficiency are leaning on observability ... Here are five key takeaways from the report ...

Q&A: Ovum Talks About APM

Pete Goldin
APMdigest

In APMdigest's exclusive interview, Michael Azoff, Principal Analyst at Ovum, discusses his discoveries while researching the Ovum Decision Matrix on APM 2014-15.

APM: What are the main changes in the APM market that you have seen since your last APM report?

MA: Log management continues to grow well as it meets demand for swift performance answers with light weight tools. The need for mobile support continues to grow as expected. Vendors are visible on the market that we have not seen at the top level before, offering reduced functionality compared with top solutions but with ease of use, competitive pricing, and enough functionality to keep users happy.

APM: What do you see as the main drivers behind the strong growth of the APM market?

MA: Applications and services are more complex. At the same time those that are consumer facing have users who will drop the app/service/website if it is slow to respond or worse. The competitive nature of the market is placing higher demands on producing high quality and high performance solutions.

APM: What are the most important new APM capabilities that a buyer should look for?

MA: For development support, it has to be source code line level detail if a crash occurs.

For operations, it needs to provide end to end transaction traceability.

Analytics is now a common feature in top end solutions. Some are more sophisticated than others, e.g. offering complex event processing, and this now extends to big data processing.

APM: What key APM capabilities do the vendors still need to work on?

MA: DevOps and continuous delivery will continue to grow in adoption and there is a role for APM to support these approaches. Also the mobile client and server side APM need to be joined up.

Some players are transitioning their solutions to meet the demands of cloud, web, and mobile, in face of new competition that has this built-in from start. The end users now want seamless cloud and on-premise solutions, as well as seamless mobile client and server side APM.

APM: In your report, you mention log management as an emerging category within APM, and you bring it up now as well. Do you see log management as a replacement for traditional APM, or as an additional capability to augment APM?

MA: Log management is sold as a complementary technology, though any organization that is budget constrained will explore log management as a minimal entry to APM. Where in-house development is conducted, then the possibility of adding purpose built logs for use by log management tools can lead to a form of DIY APM.

APM: Where does APM SaaS (Software-as-a-Service) stand currently?

MA: The pattern when speaking to vendors is that APM SaaS is growing in demand from customers and therefore needs to be available today, though there is a sizable on-premise demand from large enterprises and public sector.

APM: Traditionally BMC is seen as one of the "Big Four" leaders in APM. What caused you to put them in the challenger category instead?

MA: Our ranking of BMC is based on how well it performed against a series of metrics in three dimensions: technology, financial, and market execution. So yes, BMC has slipped measured against its peers.

All vendors make decisions about what they want or are capable of bringing to the market. This does make the solution horse race approach not always appropriate for individual customers, as lesser ranked solutions will make a better fit for some customers. This is our advice: consider our shortlist rankings but examine solutions based on your actual needs. We have a spreadsheet where our customers can weight features according to their needs and this will create a custom ranking.

APM: Any predictions about where APM is headed, and how this may impact your next report?

MA: Two vendors which just missed the boat in being included in our analysis are among the new breed solutions and we look forward to including them next time round: AppDynamics and New Relic.

It is good to see the field as active as it is, with new technologies appearing in analytics and new vendors becoming visible at the top end of market.

ABOUT Michael Azoff

Michael Azoff (PhD, MIEEE) has been working as an IT industry analyst since 2003, bringing over 20 years of experience in pure and applied research and consulting in the IT industry.

At Ovum he leads the software development and lifecycle management (SDLM) research and his current focus is on Agile practices in software development, including enterprise Agile transformation initiatives, DevOps, cloud related SDLM, rich Internet applications, and enterprise IT mobile development.

Ovum, an Informa business based in London, provides clients with independent and objective analysis that enables them to make better business and technology decisions. Ovum research draws upon over 400,000 interviews a year with business and technology, telecoms and sourcing decision-makers, giving Ovum and its clients unparalleled insight not only into business requirements but also the technology that organizations must support.

Hot Topic
The Latest
The Latest 10

The Latest

For years, production operations teams have treated alert fatigue as a quality-of-life problem: something that makes on-call rotations miserable but isn't considered a direct contributor to outages. That framing doesn't capture how these systems fail, and we now have data to show why. More importantly, it's now clear alert fatigue is a symptom of a deeper issue: production systems have outgrown the current operational approaches ...

I was on a customer call last fall when an enterprise architect said something I haven't been able to shake. Her team had just spent four months trying to swap one AI vendor for another. The original plan said three weeks. "We didn't switch vendors," she told me. "We rebuilt half our integrations and discovered what we'd actually been depending on." Most enterprise leaders don't expect that to be the experience ...

Ask any senior SRE or platform engineer what keeps them up at night, and the answer probably isn't the monitoring tool — it's the data feeding it. The proliferation of APM, observability, and AIOps platforms has created a telemetry sprawl problem that most teams manage reactively rather than architect proactively. Metrics are going to one platform. Traces routed somewhere else. Logs duplicated across multiple backends because nobody wants to be caught without them when something breaks. Every redundant stream costs money ...

80% of respondents agree that the IT role is shifting from operators to orchestrators, according to the 2026 IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous IT from SolarWinds ...

40% of organizations deploying AI will implement dedicated AI observability tools by 2028 to monitor model performance, bias and outputs, according to Gartner ...

Until AI-powered engineering tools have live visibility of how code behaves at runtime, they cannot be trusted to autonomously ensure reliable systems, according to the State of AI-Powered Engineering Report 2026 report from Lightrun. The report reveals that a major volume of manual work is required when AI-generated code is deployed: 43% of AI-generated code requires manual debugging in production, even after passing QA or staging tests. Furthermore, an average of three manual redeploy cycles are required to verify a single AI-suggested code fix in production ...

Many organizations describe AI as strategic, but they do not manage it strategically. When AI plans are disconnected from strategy, detached from organizational learning, and protected from serious assumptions testing, the problem is no longer technical immaturity; it is a failure of management discipline ... Executives too often tell organizations to "use AI" before they define what AI is supposed to change. The problem deepens in organizations where strategy isn't well articulated in the first place ...

Across the enterprise technology landscape, a quiet crisis is playing out. Organizations have run hundreds, sometimes thousands, of generative AI pilots. Leadership has celebrated the proof of concept (POCs) ... Industry experience points to a sobering reality: only 5-10% of AI POCs that progress to the pilot stage successfully reach scaled production. The remaining 90% fail because the enterprise environment around them was never ready to absorb them, not the AI models ...

Today's modern systems are not what they once were. Organizations now rely on distributed systems, event-driven workflows, hybrid and multi-cloud environments and continuous delivery pipelines. While each adds flexibility, it also introduces new, often invisible failures. Development speed is no longer the primary bottleneck of innovation. Reliability is ...

Seeing is believing, or in this case, seeing is understanding, according to New Relic's 2025 Observability Forecast for Retail and eCommerce report. Retailers who want to provide exceptional customer experiences while improving IT operations efficiency are leaning on observability ... Here are five key takeaways from the report ...