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

Azure Monitor vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

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

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (4th)
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
18th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 2.9%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Monitor2.9%
OpenText SiteScope0.8%
Other96.3%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Andy Rabern - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Telemetry insights have improved how I track user behavior and application performance daily
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it does well. My perspective is more based on an Application Insights agent running on a service or an app service and sending the telemetry via the agent, and also doing the filtering of telemetry at the agent level so you are not having a ton of telemetry. I believe Azure Monitor does pretty much the same thing. I have also used tools such as New Relic, and New Relic is a much more robust tool, but that is a different product and you are going to pay for that. It is a different offering altogether. The subscription that we had at the time allowed for a couple gigabytes of telemetry during the month, and I believe that telemetry only lives for about two months. You have to experiment with it to see how much you want to pay. I was not really involved in the pricing. It was more along the lines of we were running up against our limits in terms of the amount of free telemetry or telemetry that we get with our subscription, and so we either needed to scale back or turn specific telemetry types off or do some more sampling. It is nice that those capabilities are there so that you can reduce the amount of telemetry. I cannot really speak to pricing but I do believe that it is somewhat reasonable for Azure Monitor. New Relic is pretty expensive, I believe.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Azure Monitor's best features are its graphs and charts, the different visibility options, and reporting."
"The most valuable functions of Azure Monitor for our clients are its ability to monitor CPU usage and detect any potential issues before they escalate into actual problems. This helps in proactively addressing issues and preventing disruptions in our services. Additionally, Azure Monitor's integration with Azure for implementation has been quite straightforward and easy to manage."
"Among the valuable features of this solution, Application Insights stands out as one of the most significant. It provides insights into application performance and helps identify issues and bottlenecks."
"We like this searchability and availability of the data."
"A product that is well-integrated for monitoring Microsoft Azure."
"The most valuable feature is the universality of their functionalities in all Azure services, including, software solutions."
"Technical support is good and helpful...The initial setup is easy."
"Provides an overview and high-level information."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"The biggest benefit I see from OpenText SiteScope is that it is a very professional tool, and it helps me greatly."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"Simple deployment: The deployment uses protocols such as NetBios, SSH, WMI, SNMP, which means that any device with any of these protocols will be monitored."
 

Cons

"The price could be lower but it is not a must."
"Azure Monitor's integration with applications could be improved."
"The pricing model could be more flexible."
"The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics."
"Although it's not always the case, the price can sometimes get expensive. This depends on a number of factors, such as how many services you are trying to integrate with Azure Monitor and how much storage they're consuming each month (for example, how large are the log files?)."
"Azure Monitor is not user-friendly, and the interface is not exciting. Switching between the dashboards is not easy."
"In terms of pricing, Azure Monitor's billing based on data size can sometimes lead to increased costs, especially when developers need to purge data frequently. While there are mechanisms in place to track and manage this, there is room for improvement in terms of optimizing data pausing and related processes. Enhancements in this area could help mitigate potential billing concerns and provide a more seamless experience for users."
"There are a lot of things that take more time to do, such as charting, alerting, and correlation of data, and things like that. Azure Monitor doesn't tell you why something happened. It just tells you that it happened. It should also have some type of AI. Environments and applications are becoming more and more complex every day with hundreds or thousands of microservices. Therefore, having to do a lot of the stuff manually takes a lot of time, and on top of that, troubleshooting issues takes a lot of time. The traditional method of troubleshooting doesn't really work for or apply to this environment we're in. So, having an AI-based system and the ability to automate deployments of your monitoring and configurations makes it much easier."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
"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."
"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."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"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 a costly solution"
"It is a pay-as-you-go model. I find it very cost-effective."
"The tool is expensive."
"The tool's pricing is very good. I could say that Microsoft offers different cost models, which are listed on the product's website."
"Its cost depends on the ingestion of the logs. It could go anywhere. For an out-of-the-box platform such as FrameFlow, you pay pretty much a fixed price and you get what you get, whereas, with something like Azure Monitor, you pay by the ingestion charge, so you can have one client who pays hardly anything for the same alerts, and another client pays loads and loads."
"Azure Monitor is one of the more cost effective solutions on the market."
"The solution is a pay-as-you-go consumption service and is the least expensive in the market."
"I would rate Azure Monitor a two out of five for affordability."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
884,192 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
University
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What do you like most about Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment.
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it...
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,192 professionals have used our research since 2012.