Apica vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

Apica and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category. Apica is ranked #17 with an average rating of 7.7, while OpenText is ranked #18 with an average rating of 8.8. Apica holds a 0.3% mindshare in APM, compared to OpenText’s 0.6% mindshare. Additionally, 81% of Apica users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Apica

Read 11 Apica reviews

673 Views
257 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

OpenText SiteScope

Read 27 OpenText SiteScope reviews

1,428 Views
614 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Apica

OpenText SiteScope

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

OpenText SiteScope and Apica are both robust IT monitoring solutions tailored for enterprise-level environments. Apica seems to have the upper hand in terms of overall features and ease of use, while OpenText SiteScope is praised for its customization options and integration capabilities.

What features are offered by OpenText SiteScope in comparison to Apica?

OpenText SiteScope offers scalability, flexibility, and extensive monitoring templates. It also integrates well with other Micro Focus tools. Apica provides comprehensive end-to-end monitoring capabilities, rich real-time dashboards, and detailed synthetic monitoring. It stands out with its advanced analytics and user-friendly experience.

What areas of improvement can be found in OpenText SiteScope in comparison to Apica?

OpenText SiteScope could improve by modernizing its interface and enhancing performance metrics granularity. Users also suggest refining its user interface. Apica could benefit from better documentation and streamlining some configuration processes. Users also recommend further usability enhancements.

How is the ease of deployment and customer service of OpenText SiteScope in comparison to Apica?

OpenText SiteScope users report a more complex deployment process but robust customer support. Apica users find the deployment relatively straightforward. They also commend the proactive customer service. Apica generally has an advantage in deployment simplicity, while both have strong customer service acknowledgment.

What setup costs and ROI can be seen with OpenText SiteScope in comparison to Apica?

OpenText SiteScope is often seen as having higher initial setup costs, delivering strong ROI through deep integration and broad functionality. Apica provides solid ROI, with users noting it is worth the investment due to its comprehensive features despite sometimes higher pricing. Apica seems favorable in balancing cost with the value delivered, while OpenText SiteScope is noted for long-term returns post-setup investment.

To learn more, read our detailed Apica vs. OpenText SiteScope Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Apica vs. OpenText SiteScope

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,632 peers since 2012

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

Apica

Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

17th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Log Management (18th), IT Operations Analytics (5th), Observability Pipeline Software (2nd)

OpenText SiteScope

Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

18th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Apica is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.6%, 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

Punith H K

Senior Systems Engineer at Infosys

Enables users to create scripts easily and provides excellent real-time monitoring features

It is easy to create scripts. We don't have to write any script. Ready-made options are available. We can select, drag, and drop the options, and the script is ready. The solution’s real-time monitoring features have had a huge impact on our service delivery. If we have an application and the script for it, we keep monitoring it. When the script goes red, it indicates that something is not working. So, we check and analyze the applications. We keep track of applications and monitor whether they are live or not. The tool is also useful for monitoring cloud services.

Read full review

Gyanesh Rahatekar

Back office at Reliance Industries Ltd

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution’s real-time monitoring features have had a huge impact on our service delivery."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"There are several features that are really good. The first one is the flexibility and the advanced configuration that Apica offers when it comes to configuring synthetic checks. It provides the ability to customize how the check should be performed and it is very flexible in the number of synthetic locations that it can use. It allows us to run scripts from different locations all over the world, and they have a really good number of these locations."

"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."

More Apica pros

"The system is really powerful; instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence."

"I would rate the stability of OpenText SiteScope as excellent."

"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."

"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."

"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."

"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."

"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."

"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."

More OpenText SiteScope pros

Cons

"The having to install an application on your desktop to utilize something like ZebraTester is a little cumbersome. It would be nice to see that become a web-based application. Having the documentation a little more accessible, and easier to digest by people who are just learning how to use the framework, especially when it comes to more complex or more edge-based cases would be really helpful to have."

"Apica is costly, and there's no way to test mobile applications through Apica."

"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."

"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."

"It is difficult to create a script using ZebraTester."

"Apica was a relatively new tool when I started using it. Although Apica had good documentation, it still felt less developed or advanced than a tool like LoadRunner."

"If you are adding any input file, the tool fails to capture the path."

"The tool does not provide automatic correlation features."

More Apica cons

"There is a need to enhance the reporting feature in OpenText SiteScope. Reporting related to performance information for historical data needs improvement to provide better reporting related to application availability and end node availability."

"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."

"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."

"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."

"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."

"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."

"Direct integration with an SMS gateway for sending critical alerts to the support SME. This will help customer investing in third party middleware solutions for SMS."

"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."

More OpenText SiteScope cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing and licensing are very reasonable. At the end of the day, you are using their technology/software and getting X amount of checks for a very decent value. As for discounts, they try to meet your budgets as much as they can. For example, if you need 100 checks and you have X amount of budget for it, then they will try and get down to that price. Costing-wise, it is a reasonably cost product. They will always try and come down to your price if you need them to come down to it by knocking off certain areas."

"The solution's pricing is not cheap, but it is in the midrange."

"The tool is completely free and open source. I've been using it for about two and a half years and installed it on both my personal and client machines without needing a license. All features are available for use without any hidden fees."

"Another main difference between Apica and the other products was the cost. We really thought that the balance in Apica between the features and costs was the best among all the products on which we did a PoC."

"I know Apica is an expensive solution, but it is worth the money for the service it provides."

"License management is another area that Apica could do better. We have already had these conversations with our account teams. This is something that they are looking at largely improving in upcoming releases. I believe that this is already on their roadmap."

"The pricing is fair. It is neither too cheap nor too expensive."

"The level of alerting accuracy has saved us time and money in operational costs. Overall, it has automated a lot of the manual efforts which have been more complex with some of our other scripting tools or monitors. So, it brings things together by doing things faster and saves us money."

More Apica pricing and cost advice

"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."

"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."

"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."

"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."

"When Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope has introduced approximately eight years ago and there was not very much competition making the price high. However, when comparing the price of Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope now to other tools, they should reduce the price. It is similar to a legacy tool at this point."

"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."

"Licensing is a little steep."

"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."

More OpenText SiteScope pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

28%

Computer Software Company

10%

Media Company

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

32%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apica Synthetic?

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 integr...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apica Synthetic?

I know Apica is an expensive solution, but it is worth the money for the service it provides.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Apica Synthetic?

Apica cannot perform endurance or scale-up tests independently. It requires other tools like ALM. When editing scripts, only one can be accessed at a time, risking changes affecting other folders. ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?

The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?

Integration related to other applications with OpenText SiteScope is effective, as we are using both functionalities in our environment. The integration for other applications related to alerts and...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dynatrace vs Apica

Compared 26% of the time

Cribl vs Apica

Compared 22% of the time

AlertSite vs Apica

Compared 14% of the time

Datadog vs Apica

Compared 14% of the time

Splunk Enterprise Security vs Apica

Compared 13% of the time

More Apica Competitors

Dynatrace vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 12% of the time

OmniPeek vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 11% of the time

Grafana vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Real User Monitoring vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 9% of the time

Splunk AppDynamics vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 9% of the time

More OpenText SiteScope Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Apica

July 2025

Download Apica product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText SiteScope

March 2025

Download OpenText SiteScope product report

Also Known As

Apica LoadTest, Apica Synthetic

Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope

Overview

Apica offers a unified platform to remove complexity and cost associated with data management. You collect, control, store, and observe your data and can quickly identify and resolve performance issues before they impact the end-user. Apica Ascent swiftly analyzes telemetry data in real-time, enabling prompt issue resolution, while automated root cause analysis, powered by machine learning, streamlines troubleshooting in complex distributed systems. The platform simplifies data collection by automating and managing agents through the platform’s Fleet product. Its Flow product simplifies and optimizes pipeline control with AI and ML to help you easily understand complex workflows. Its Store component allows you to never run out of storage space while you index and store machine data centrally on one platform and reduce costs, and remediate faster. Observe offers modern observability data management, helping you with MELT data, effortless dashboarding, and seamless integration of synthetic and real data.

Experience the Apica Ascent Platform

Apica

OpenText SiteScope is an agentless monitoring program that tracks the availability and performance of distributed IT infrastructures such as servers, network devices and services, applications and application components, virtualization software, operating systems, and other IT enterprise components.

OpenText SiteScope is an autonomous hybrid IT monitoring system that can monitor more than 100 different types of IT components in real time, thanks to a lightweight and highly customizable remote access architecture.

With OpenText SiteScope, IT teams can get the data they need to keep on top of problems and eliminate bottlenecks before they become major concerns.

OpenText SiteScope can reduce total cost of ownership (TCO) by utilizing agentless technology, which eliminates the need to install and monitor agents on each box. Manual activities can be automated, and teams can save time and effort by using pre-packaged solution templates.

OpenText SiteScope Features

OpenText SiteScope has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

Broad functionality built on expertise: OpenText SiteScope's architecture is scalable and supports a broad range of functions, including data collecting, alerting, event management, and reporting. Data is collected via remote access, which eliminates the need for agents to be deployed and maintained on monitored nodes. OpenText SiteScope connects to systems as a remote user via the central server, which supports JMX, SNMP, HTTP, SSH, NetBIOS, and WMI.

Monitors legacy and modern environments: OpenText SiteScope comes with more than 100 built-in monitors that track things like utilization, response time, use, and resource availability.
- Cloud: You can monitor virtual servers and applications on Amazon Web Services (AWS). AWS-hosted applications can provide data to Amazon CloudWatch, which can be used for auto-scaling, reporting, and alerting.
- Virtualization: OpenText SiteScope supports VMware, Microsoft, Citrix, and Oracle/Sun virtualization technologies. Monitor Docker clusters, nodes, containers, and workloads.

Flexibility with configuration: By adding or deleting specific monitors, you can adapt to dynamic changes in data center configuration.

Templates for solutions: The template database is based on best practices for monitoring complex application settings with the least amount of time and effort. The templates include built-in domain experience of specialized monitors, default metrics and thresholds, proactive testing, and best practices for a given application or monitoring component.

Notifications, alerts, and reports: Email, SNMP traps, HTTP post, and database alerts are all supported. Administrators receive alerts based on defined thresholds and schedules.

Flexibility in user management: Using LDAP or an internal management solution, define group-level permissions, construct user roles, and assign security groups depending on role. Extensive WS (Web Service)-based API that automates numerous management situations without the need for the SiteScope UI.

Integrations with SiteScope: OpenText SiteScope not only offers a number of benefits on its own, but it can also be linked with a number of OpenText and third-party solutions, giving teams the ability to properly integrate their IT operations center.

OpenText

Sample Customers

HBO, JPMC, Morgan Stanley, Xander, EA Sports, Volvo

Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank

Buyer's Guide

Apica vs. OpenText SiteScope

June 2025

Free Report: Apica vs. OpenText SiteScope

Find out what your peers are saying about Apica vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Apica vs. OpenText SiteScope report.

See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.