No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ConnectWise Automate vs ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus 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

ConnectWise Automate
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) (10th)
ManageEngine Patch Manager ...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Patch Management (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

ConnectWise Automate and ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. ConnectWise Automate is designed for Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) and holds a mindshare of 6.2%, down 7.4% compared to last year.
ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, on the other hand, focuses on Patch Management, holds 3.9% mindshare, down 6.4% since last year.
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ConnectWise Automate6.2%
Kaseya VSA12.8%
NinjaOne10.2%
Other70.8%
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
Patch Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus3.9%
NinjaOne7.5%
Microsoft Configuration Manager7.0%
Other81.6%
Patch Management
 

Featured Reviews

MikeChacker - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager Global Service Delivery at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Facilitates valuable patch cycles, but the web client is not very intuitive and needs updating, and the scripting has room for improvement
The fixed client for Automate is slow. The web client is not very intuitive. It could use some updating and some thought around the UX. Also, with the scripting, I would like to see something where it could have third-party scripts already pre-built, and all you have to do is say, "Hey, I need this," and go load it. It's not as automated as I'd like it to be.
ManojNair2 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Centralized patching has unified multi‑OS management and delivers detailed security reporting
Based on my experience, a better function would be to address the problem that the product only scans a machine once a day. It has a central scanning activity that scans every laptop for changes in assets, meaning both hardware and software, as well as installed software for patches. However, this activity works only once per day and does not work on local time. If you are a global organization with the UK office and a colleague in the US, for example, and you set the task at 11:00 AM UK time, that translates to 6:00 AM in the US East Coast. If that colleague's laptop is on, the task completes; otherwise, it fails. This represents a major drawback because the task does not run on the local time of the system. Regarding the ability to create multiple tasks, you cannot create them, which is another significant issue. Only one task exists for these two activities. That one task performs both the hardware and software scanning for any changes and also conducts a patch scan. Both activities occur through the same task, but the problem is that if you have a global user base, this becomes a bottleneck.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Scripting and patch management are really important for us. Patch Manager is something that we use a lot, and we would love to have it continually improved. It is one of the most useful features for us for controlling patches and other things for different clients."
"A good automated scripts feature."
"Remote access and detailed monitoring help us support our equipment."
"One of the greatest benefits of LabTech is less client downtime, because LabTech lets you proactively monitor and fix issues before they interrupt your clients’ business, so you can virtually eliminate system outages."
"The initial setup is easy and the deployment is quick."
"It is very scalable."
"The database is great. It's a nicely ordered database."
"The most value we get from this solution is that everything is on a patch cycle, so all my team has to do is go through patches, whereas previously, they were doing all the patches manually."
"The best features in ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus are the connectivity across different platforms, such as connectivity with Rapid7, connectivity with CrowdStrike, and connectivity with the SIEM solution."
"The pricing for ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is reasonable."
"The solution's technical support is top-notch. Whenever I have a question, they get back to me immediately, which is probably one of the best features of the solution's technical support."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is centralized management."
"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."
"ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is lightweight and has a remote push feature that helps me manage several main sites and subsites."
"The fetch repository is a good feature."
"The most valuable features are patch management and mobile device management."
 

Cons

"The wait time for a support ticket to be addressed needs to be reduced. They take a couple of days to get back."
"We would love to get feature updates and cumulative updates fixed. I know they aren't really supposed to be pushed with Patch Manager. We've got recommendations from ConnectWise to use the scripted feature update installs, scripted KB updates, etc. Having these in Patch Manager itself would be great."
"I almost would rather have a different tool, but I'm not sure which one yet."
"I have found the solution to be not very scalable."
"This is a raw system. Of course, it has some flaws that could be improved. But, it's something that we will have to work with to get to the point where we need this, we request it and they do their best to make it happen."
"I know we get some false positives at times, where things report offline and then when we connect to them with control they're connectable."
"Technical support was helpful."
"They could use some automated alerts particularly when we're talking about an MSP that might shoot over."
"The only area for improvement in ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, which I noticed, is the reporting."
"Based on my experience, a better function would be to address the problem that the product only scans a machine once a day."
"The solution should have a customer label where we can label those servers or include those servers for specific customers."
"I find the user interface a little bit intimidating and not very appealing."
"ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus needs to improve speed."
"The tool's support needs improvement."
"They should add better features for managing hardware."
"Patching over the Internet should be improved. If I am traveling, I should have an Internet patching option for control, visibility, and vulnerability management for roaming users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I pay $85 a month per user for a ConnectWise package that contains multiple solutions."
"Pricing and licensing are reasonable."
"I believe Automate is available for around $2."
"From what I've overheard, it is pretty comparable to other solutions in terms of price."
"I rate the price of the product a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and the charge for support is extra."
"ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is a little bit cheaper."
"Patch Manager is cost-effective."
"Its price needs improvement."
"The pricing for ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is on the moderate side."
"The solution cost is around $5,000 per year."
"I rate the product price a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) solutions are best for your needs.
905,526 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
10%
Performing Arts
9%
Construction Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
University
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise1
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus?
Pricing for ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is pretty reasonable. Currently, I am paying around three dollars per agent per month.
What needs improvement with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus?
Based on my experience, a better function would be to address the problem that the product only scans a machine once a day. It has a central scanning activity that scans every laptop for changes in...
What is your primary use case for ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus?
ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus was the first solution on the cloud six years ago when I started using this product. Although other competitors existed in the market, they were either behind in ter...
 

Also Known As

LabTech for IT Service Providers, ConnectWise Automate for Corporate IT Departments, ConnectWise Automate for IT Service Providers
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

I-M Technology, Mainstay Technologies, PC Works Plus, Integrity IT, Kerkhoff Technologies Inc., Marathon Consulting, Christenberry Sales Company, EDTS, Secom Technology, Ready to View, ARRC Technology, DaVinci Digital, JNR Networks, Quinn Technology Solutions, PCIT, Liberty Technology, Capital Computers & Networks, Atlanta Technology Force, Doberman Technologies, First Column Enterprises, CisCom Solutions
IKEA Honda UNICEF The University of Georgia Evander
Find out what your peers are saying about NinjaOne, Kaseya, TeamViewer and others in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM). Updated: July 2026.
905,526 professionals have used our research since 2012.