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

OpenText SiteScope vs Splunk AppDynamics comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 2025

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

OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Splunk AppDynamics
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
258
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (6th), IT Operations Analytics (2nd), Mobile APM (1st), Container Monitoring (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Splunk AppDynamics is 3.6%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Splunk AppDynamics3.6%
OpenText SiteScope0.7%
Other95.7%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Gyanesh Rahatekar - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
DK
Technology lead at Infosys
Has enabled us to detect issues instantly through alerts and monitor every service from a single dashboard
Splunk requires significantly more improvements compared to Splunk AppDynamics, specifically regarding the licensing aspect. Splunk renews licenses every six months, which is inconvenient. It would be better to have a one-year license to avoid needing to update keys constantly, which can only occur on weekends, making it a burdensome task. Although Splunk is better for certain use cases, Splunk AppDynamics is broader in functionality. Specifically, I want enhancements related to creating dashboards not only for logs or minor services but also for configuration levels, allowing us to check configurations immediately without manually opening the entire code when exceptions arise—a feature I wish to see improved in Splunk, although it may not be necessary for Splunk AppDynamics.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"I would rate the stability of OpenText SiteScope as excellent."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"The product's readymade templates are perfect. It supports us a lot when we don't have much experience with the product. The templates offers us direction to proceed."
"The tool has capabilities other than managing web-based applications, like URL Monitor and EPI Script. It is also easy to use the tool."
"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."
"The features related to the application performance in AppDynamics Database Monitoring are the most valuable."
"I find troubleshooting is quicker because we can drill down into the end points and see which endpoints are getting critical. Visibility-wise, the micro details are easy to find."
"The real-time monitoring is what we can see for anything that is needed in terms of CPU, memory, or the connections or the sessions related, and it's highly effective because we use it all the time to monitor both component performance and business transactions to check the actual user experience in terms of response time."
"Has helped us to increase customer acquisitions and reduce revenue leakage."
"The release management capabilities are great."
"This solution is easy to use and very powerful, it is a complete tool for us."
"AppDynamics has a very broad range of supported technologies, and it's user-friendly. It looks nice, and it's easy to sell the solution to the stakeholders when we can visualize how the website is working. For example, where we have any problems through visual analytics."
"In my experience, it's easy to use. There's nothing complex to learn or fear. You can quickly adapt to it without the need for extensive training."
 

Cons

"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."
"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"The interface of OpenText SiteScope needs improvement. It has a Java-based interface, which is slow and could be simplified for better usability."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"The agent deployment could be simplified by, for example, adding a GUI."
"To improve Splunk AppDynamics, it should migrate seamlessly into observability Splunk, which is called Splunk Observability Cloud."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The synthetic scripting for end-user monitoring could be a little bit broader. Instead of using just Python, they can include a few other languages so that not everyone has to jump on the bandwagon for Python and do Selenium scripting. They can open up that a bit to make it simpler for people to do the scripting."
"There could log management features included in the product."
"The dashboard can be better. Also, the automated reports could be improved."
"It could be a little more flexible in configuration on the back end."
"The UI could use a little help."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"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."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"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."
"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."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"We find its pricing reasonable and competitive. After it was acquired by Cisco, we found it acceptable."
"Take into consideration what you get for specific pricing models and how much it costs to add on things you may need later.​"
"Our purchasing experience through the AWS Marketplace has been pretty painless."
"The licensing cost is fairly high"
"The tool is expensive."
"AppDynamics Database Monitoring is expensive. I rate it a seven to eight out of ten."
"AppDynamics is one of the most expensive solutions on the market."
"The solution has a high cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
880,511 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
8%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business55
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise193
 

Questions from the Community

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?
Regarding areas for improvement, there may be minor issues, but I have not faced any significant issues with OpenText SiteScope because I have a team that uses this product daily. As a monitoring d...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
OpenText SiteScope has a lot of use cases including monitoring websites, monitoring URLs, monitoring infrastructure resources like CPU, hard disk, and memory usage, and customized monitoring script...
Any advice about APM solutions?
There are many factors and we know little about your requirements (size of org, technology stack, management systems, the scope of implementation). Our goal was to consolidate APM and infra monitor...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AppDynamics?
I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten. The solution is highly expensive. Our company pays for the solution on a yearly basis, if we don't add new modules or features to the license, we need ...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Cisco, Sony, Nasdaq, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, Edmunds.com, Puma, Fox News, DirecTV, Pizza Hut, T-Systems, Cornell University, OpenTable, BITMARCK, Green Mountain Power, Care.com, Overstock, Paddy Power, eHarmony, Kraft, The Motley Fool, The Container Store, and more See more customers
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText SiteScope vs. Splunk AppDynamics and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
880,511 professionals have used our research since 2012.