CA App Synthetic Monitor vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

Broadcom and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category. Broadcom is ranked #73, while OpenText is ranked #17 with an average rating of 9.2. Broadcom holds a 0.5% mindshare in APM, compared to OpenText’s 1.1% mindshare. Additionally, 66% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

CA App Synthetic Monitor

Read 3 CA App Synthetic Monitor reviews

1,518 Views
1,503 Comparison Views

66% willing to recommend

OpenText SiteScope

Read 29 OpenText SiteScope reviews

4,726 Views
4,442 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

CA App Synthetic Monitor

OpenText SiteScope

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

OpenText SiteScope and CA App Synthetic Monitor are both prominent in application monitoring. CA App Synthetic Monitor has a competitive edge due to its superior features, despite OpenText SiteScope being praised for its pricing and support.

What features are offered by OpenText SiteScope in comparison to CA App Synthetic Monitor?

OpenText SiteScope offers robust monitoring capabilities, comprehensive reporting tools, and cost-effective solutions. CA App Synthetic Monitor provides real-time synthetic monitoring, ease of scripting, and advanced feature offerings.

What areas of improvement can be found in OpenText SiteScope in comparison to CA App Synthetic Monitor?

OpenText SiteScope needs a more intuitive configuration process, better performance during high-load periods, and reduced configuration complexity. CA App Synthetic Monitor requires more flexible alerting options, enhanced integration capabilities, and better customer service responsiveness.

How is the ease of deployment and customer service of OpenText SiteScope in comparison to CA App Synthetic Monitor?

OpenText SiteScope has a straightforward deployment process but needs ample configuration, and it provides commendable customer service. CA App Synthetic Monitor has seamless deployment, minimal configuration needs, and satisfactory customer service.

What setup costs and ROI can be seen with OpenText SiteScope in comparison to CA App Synthetic Monitor?

OpenText SiteScope is viewed as cost-effective with solid ROI. CA App Synthetic Monitor, while more expensive, justifies the investment with high user satisfaction and feature-rich offerings.

To learn more, read our detailed CA App Synthetic Monitor vs. OpenText SiteScope Report (Updated: August 2026).

Buyer's Guide

CA App Synthetic Monitor vs. OpenText SiteScope

August 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 909,099 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

CA App Synthetic Monitor

Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

73rd

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

5.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText SiteScope

Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

17th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of CA App Synthetic Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 1.1%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText SiteScope	1.1%
CA App Synthetic Monitor	0.5%
Other	98.4%

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

Featured Reviews

reviewer2286675

System Administrator at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

A reliable solution for SSL offloading and to encrypt outside traffic

If you are responsible for monitoring the logs in F5, it isn't very easy. The format is complicated compared to different vendors. For example, Fortinet and Cisco have feasible formats for sending and fetching logs. Suppose I'm monitoring the logs and everything, and when I am retrieving logs from F5, I want to know whether it is regular traffic or any abnormality is happening. The logs itself is not user-friendly. It may not give you a clear way of what's happening. You have to go through different websites and work on it. You have to waste so much time on it.

Read full review

Hosney Osman

Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone

Proactive monitoring has reduced response time and has improved capacity planning accuracy

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 dashboard user, I do not have any negative feedback. A feature that could be added is direct integration with a ticketing tool, as it would help operation teams directly detect alarms and alerts happening in our infrastructure. Direct integration with a ticketing tool such as Remedy would be a good feature. OpenText SiteScope has some limitations, especially with integration between OpenText SiteScope and Remedy, which must be done through middle software. There are also limitations for cloud monitoring as well as for Docker and Kubernetes.

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

"Each had strengths in one area or another, but CA covered the majority of our needs end-to-end."

"From our experience, it really helps managers in measuring application SLAs and viewing historical performance data."

"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."

"The biggest benefit I see from OpenText SiteScope is that it is a very professional tool, and it helps me greatly."

"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."

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

"My advice to other people considering SiteScope as a solution in this category of tools is that I think SiteScope is a good product."

"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."

"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."

"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

"Pricing makes little sense. We had examples where it would be cheaper to have two basic accounts than one intermediate."

"The RBMS component is limited as you can only record using Internet Explorer."

"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."

"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."

"We'll probably remove SiteScope shortly because we've been using another monitoring tool in production. SiteScope is just not something we use very much of any more."

"I think that the scalability needs to be worked on a bit. We can scale fine horizontally, but we’d like to scale less horizontal and be more compact."

"Monitor mobile health status too."

"I would be very interested in having transaction traceability included in the product, to give us a better view of what is really going wrong in a particular method and action."

"If you're considering Sitescope as your sole or primary monitoring tool, I suggest you take a look around - there are better options for you."

"Licensing is a little steep. Since HP's acquisition of the product, licensing is done on a points-per-monitor basis, and with literally hundreds of nodes and application monitors available, costs can get steep."

More OpenText SiteScope cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

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

"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."

"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 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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

909,099 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Construction Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	21

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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?

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Splunk AppDynamics vs CA App Synthetic Monitor

Compared 22% of the time

IDERA Precise vs CA App Synthetic Monitor

Compared 7% of the time

Stackify vs CA App Synthetic Monitor

Compared 7% of the time

LogicMonitor vs CA App Synthetic Monitor

Compared 7% of the time

Snyk vs CA App Synthetic Monitor

Compared 7% of the time

More CA App Synthetic Monitor Competitors

Splunk AppDynamics vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 9% of the time

Dynatrace vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Real User Monitoring vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 6% of the time

VMware Aria Operations for Applications vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 6% of the time

Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText SiteScope Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

August 2026

Download CA App Synthetic Monitor product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText SiteScope

July 2026

Download OpenText SiteScope product report

Also Known As

CA ASM

Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope

Overview

CA App Synthetic Monitor provides proactive monitoring of web applications and services to ensure performance and availability. It allows businesses to identify and resolve problems before they impact users.

By simulating user interactions and analyzing application performance, CA App Synthetic Monitor enables businesses to maintain optimal service levels. This cloud-based solution offers a comprehensive view of application health through real-time monitoring and alerts, facilitating quick identification of performance bottlenecks and outages. It helps IT teams enhance user experience by predicting potential issues and optimizing resource allocation. Its flexibility and scalability cater to a range of business needs.

What are key features of CA App Synthetic Monitor?

Real-Time Monitoring: Continuous monitoring of web applications to detect issues quickly.
Global Reach: Simulate user transactions from multiple locations worldwide.
Custom Alerts: Set up customized alerts for specific performance thresholds.
Detailed Reporting: Access in-depth analysis of application performance metrics.
Scalability: Easily scalable to match growing business demands.

What benefits or ROI should users expect?

Improved User Experience: By identifying issues early, end-users encounter fewer disruptions.
Cost Efficiency: Reduces downtime-related costs through early detection and resolution.
Enhanced Reliability: Ensures application reliability and reduces service outages.
Time Saving: Automates performance checks to save time for IT teams.

Industries such as e-commerce, finance, and IT services implement CA App Synthetic Monitor to ensure their software systems remain performant under various conditions. For e-commerce, it assures checkout processes run smoothly. Financial sectors use it to guarantee secure and reliable transaction handling. IT services leverage its capabilities to maintain service level agreements, ensuring customer satisfaction in digital interactions.

Broadcom

OpenText SiteScope provides agentless monitoring of infrastructure and applications, offering an intuitive experience with comprehensive solutions for managing APIs, URLs, and log files. It's designed for those seeking ease of use and flexibility without the need for server agents.

SiteScope is known for its agentless architecture that facilitates seamless monitoring across a range of technologies including AWS, VMware, and APIs. Users benefit from ready-to-use templates and an intuitive dashboard. Despite its flexibility, SiteScope has challenges with integration and modern features like cloud and DevOps monitoring. The Java interface is slow and setup can be cumbersome, with costly licensing and room for improvement in reporting and scalability.

What are the key features of OpenText SiteScope?

Agentless Architecture: Eliminates the need for server agents, minimizing intrusion.
Ready-to-Use Templates: Simplifies monitoring setup across different environments.
Comprehensive Monitoring: Supports server, database, URL, and API monitoring.
Integration Capabilities: Works with AWS, VMware, and other technologies.
Intuitive Dashboard: Provides easy-to-understand data visualization.

What benefits and ROI can be expected?

Cost Efficiency: Agentless setup reduces operational costs.
Flexibility: Supports multiple technologies and environments.
Time Management: Predefined templates save setup time.
Performance Assurance: Ensures consistent performance with synthetic monitoring.
Operational Insight: Enhances decision-making through comprehensive data visualization.

OpenText SiteScope is implemented in industries like healthcare and government organizations for maintaining system performance and uptime. It supports monitoring across platforms, including Linux, Windows, and VMware, enabling users to address infrastructure and application monitoring needs without agent-related challenges.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Lexmark

Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank

Buyer's Guide

CA App Synthetic Monitor vs. OpenText SiteScope

August 2026

Free Report: CA App Synthetic Monitor vs. OpenText SiteScope

Find out what your peers are saying about CA App Synthetic Monitor vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

909,099 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CA App Synthetic Monitor 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.