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

Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) 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

Google Cloud's operations s...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
28th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (30th), Cloud Monitoring Software (21st)
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is 1.0%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.6%, up from 0.5% 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 (%)
OpenText SiteScope0.6%
Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)1.0%
Other98.4%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Anand_Patel - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers reliable Ops Agent and logging transport feature with easy third-party integrations
As part of our company, we implemented several changes in our log analytics pattern, including the storage and procurement process. Earlier, before implementing the solution, our company was able to procure only one year of data, but later, we came to the three-year mark. Around 15-20% reduction has been witnessed in the total analytic consumption of our company. The aforementioned result was possible because the solution allowed the creation of a dashboard where factors like storage costs, proportion of logs, and logs presence in a storage bucket or BigQuery can all be checked. Earlier all logs were stored in a raw storage, but currently our company is able to move logs in table bucket that contributes towards cost savings.
Gyanesh Rahatekar - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"The features that I have found most valuable are its graphs - if I need any statistics, in Kubernetes or Kong level or VPN level, I can quickly get the reports."
"I like the monitoring feature."
"The cloud login enables us to get our logs from the different platforms that we currently use."
"Provides visibility into the performance uptime."
"It's easy to use."
"Our company has a corporate account for Google Cloud and so our systems and clusters integrate really well."
"Google's technical support is very good."
"Offers a valuable logging transport feature"
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"There's no agent you need installed on the servers. In our environment, we have some servers out of our control so we cannot manage them. We use SiteScope to monitor the availability, the resources on the servers, etc. This allows us to do this job without installing agents so there's no need to take care of anything on the server."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
 

Cons

"It could be even more automated."
"This solution could be improved if it offered the ability to analyze charts, such as a solution like Kibana."
"The product provides minimal metrics that are insufficient."
"The process of logging analytics can be improved"
"While we are satisfied with the overall performance, in certain cases we must add additional metrics and additional tools like Grafana and Dynatrace."
"It could be more stable."
"Lacking sufficient operations documentation."
"It is difficult to estimate in advance how much something is going to cost."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"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."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"The interface of OpenText SiteScope needs improvement. It has a Java-based interface, which is slow and could be simplified for better usability."
"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."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a basic standard license without any additional costs."
"The cost of using Stackdriver depends on usage."
"The cost could be lower."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"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."
"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 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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
869,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
14%
Media Company
7%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
9%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Google Stackdriver?
If the errors are caught early in the interface, it would be easier for users to manage. The process of logging analytics can be improved.
What is your primary use case for Google Stackdriver?
I use the solution for logging, defining alerts, and monitoring. Our company's Java and Python logging teams mainly use it.
What advice do you have for others considering Google Stackdriver?
The Ops Agent and logging transport feature of the solution have had a major impact on improving application performance. The solution also allows the transport of logs into log buckets, which is h...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring.
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?
The new version D2 has improved with a smart plan UI interface. However, while still using the classic WebTop UI, it looks outdated and not HTML5 compatible. They are currently in progress to migra...
 

Also Known As

Google Stackdriver, Stackdriver Monitoring, Stackdriver Logging, Google Cloud Monitoring
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Uber, Batterii, Q42, Dovetail Games
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.