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

Amazon CloudWatch vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Amazon CloudWatch
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (13th), Cloud Monitoring Software (9th)
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
31st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Amazon CloudWatch is 1.7%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Rahul Kundu - PeerSpot reviewer
Proactively address issues with seamless monitoring while enhancing custom metrics functionality
We use CloudWatch for monitoring and logging. It helps us monitor our applications' performance, particularly in ensuring that every API hit returns a response within four seconds, which is our SLA. We also monitor invocation errors in Lambda and use CloudWatch alerts to notify us of any issues…
Gyanesh Rahatekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Achieve seamless incident response with valuable monitoring capabilities and reliable alerts
There are multiple features related to OpenText SiteScope monitoring that I have found to be very useful, such as SSL monitoring. If SSL is present as a file in a server, then OpenText SiteScope is a very effective tool to monitor when that certificate expires. It provides comprehensive information related to SSL certificates and log monitoring. If any kind of required keyword monitoring is present in the log file, OpenText SiteScope has excellent functionality for monitoring. It is very easy to configure and obtain the correct information related to end-user requirements. The agentless monitoring feature of OpenText SiteScope is particularly impressive and easy to configure and gather information from. According to the operations team perspective, there is no impact related to resource management from the agentless monitoring. It demonstrates very low resource consumption related to its functionality.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a stable solution...I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"CloudWatch provides essential monitoring capabilities that integrate seamlessly with other AWS services."
"The tool enables live monitoring."
"We can create events and alerts. We use the information to dive down into the infrastructure performance."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon CloudWatch is its ease of use and logs. You do not have to go to each separate system to see the logs, such as Syslog and they are located in one dashboard GUI."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon CloudWatch is collecting the logs from Lambda."
"It's a very simple logging system."
"Amazon CloudWatch's best feature stems from its ability to monitor app performance."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"Instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence. It allows me to create scripts and automate several processes, making tasks simpler and more efficient."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
"The tool has capabilities other than managing web-based applications, like URL Monitor and EPI Script. It is also easy to use the tool."
"I find OpenText SiteScope itself to be uncomplicated and deserving of a ten out of ten due to its simplicity."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
 

Cons

"I found several areas for improvement in Amazon CloudWatch. First is that it's tough to track issues and find out where it's going wrong. The process takes longer. For example, if I get an exception error, I read the logs, search, go to AWS Cloud, then to the groups to find the keyword to determine what's wrong. Another area for improvement in Amazon CloudWatch is that it's slow in terms of log streaming. It requires an entire twenty-four hours for scanning, rather than just one hour. This issue can be solved with Elasticsearch streaming with Kibana, but it requires a lot of development effort and integration with Kibana or Splunk, and this also means I need a separate developer and software technical stack to do the indexing and streaming to Kibana. It's a manual effort that you need to do properly, so log streaming should be improved in Amazon CloudWatch. The AWS support person should also have a better understanding of the logs in Amazon CloudWatch. What I'd like added to the solution is a more advanced search function, particularly one that can tell you more information or special information. Right now, the search function is difficult to use because it only gives you limited data. For example, I got an error message saying that the policy wasn't created. I only know the amount the customer paid for the policy, the mobile number, and the customer name, but if I use those details, the information won't show up on the logs. I need to enter more details, so that's the type of fuzzy matching Amazon CloudWatch won't provide. If this type of search functionality is provided, it will be very helpful for businesses and companies that provide professional services to customers, like ours."
"The dashboard of Amazon CloudWatch is not very customizable right now."
"The integration with third-party tools must be made easier."
"Some of our customers want to use Kubernetes to monitor their CICD flow but Amazon CloudWatch does not support it. We need to use another solution, such as Datadog or Dynatrace has the needed capability."
"Amazon CloudWatch's pricing needs improvement."
"Better reporting is always something needed. That could be an answer to just about anything. But you always want better reporting, better dashboards, things that are just more dynamic and more accessible."
"For monitoring applications or for APM, CloudWatch has some limitations. You cannot monitor application performance from CloudWatch, and you have to go for a third-party tool."
"There's a learning curve with Amazon CloudWatch since we have to learn to write the queries to extract the keys and logs."
"Sometimes in a huge environment, I think the documentation does not provide the required calculations so you can't know what the required set up should be. You need to test."
"The interface of OpenText SiteScope needs improvement. It has a Java-based interface, which is slow and could be simplified for better usability."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"They have not kept up with browser security requirements or advances in GUIs, they switched to a corruptible database architecture instead of text config files."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It’s an open-source solution."
"The price is okay for me."
"The pricing can be considered reasonable, especially when already operating on a cloud platform."
"The pricing is average."
"The tool is not expensive."
"Amazon CloudWatch has very cheap pricing, and it hardly costs my company $25-$30 a month for fifty systems, so it's pretty affordable."
"The price of Amazon CloudWatch is reasonable. When the rate of data collection is done the price will increase. The price is less than other solutions."
"The solution is expensive."
"It is expensive. I don't like its licensing. I don't like anything where you have to license it by individual licenses. I'm not a fan of that, but that's just me."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"The pricing or licensing cost for Micro Focus SiteScope is often bundled with other things, so the cost for each individual would be difficult to calculate. Pricing could be $2,000,000 a year. My company pays for technical support because it's part of the contract with Micro Focus SiteScope. You buy the licenses, but you're also paying for the support. With Nagios, it's much more bare-bones as far as paying for licenses and the software itself, and my company didn't have to use as much Nagios support yet in one or two years because there weren't too many problems using Nagios, and it's much more cost-effective, so that's one of the reasons why my company is migrating to Nagios from Micro Focus SiteScope."
"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
"The product's pricing should be lower since there are many open-source products that can do the same job with better user interfaces. The tool's pricing is yearly and you need to pay for support."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
857,585 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Real Estate/Law Firm
5%
Financial Services Firm
33%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon CloudWatch?
Amazon CloudWatch charges more for custom metrics as well as for changes in the timeline, which I see as a disadvantage given the price.
What needs improvement with Amazon CloudWatch?
Amazon CloudWatch charges extra for custom metrics, which is a significant disadvantage. Another aspect that needs improvement is the look and feel of custom dashboards, which currently do not matc...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
The licensing scheme for Micro Focus tools is reasonable, and more affordable. It's seen as medium or de-receivable.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
The interface of OpenText SiteScope needs improvement. It has a Java-based interface, which is slow and could be simplified for better usability.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AirAsia, Airbnb, Aircel, APUS, Avazu, Casa & Video, Futbol Club Barcelona (FCBarcelona), National Taiwan University, redBus
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon CloudWatch vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,585 professionals have used our research since 2012.