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

ITRS Geneos 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

ITRS Geneos
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
34th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (64th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (45th)
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 ITRS Geneos is 1.0%, down from 1.3% 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 (%)
OpenText SiteScope0.8%
ITRS Geneos1.0%
Other98.2%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

DeepakR - PeerSpot reviewer
Site Reliability Engineer(Observability) at Sapiens
If one server fails, the agent will automatically be reinstalled
ITRS Geneos is a legacy system. It predicts or provides proactive measures once an issue is resolved. It doesn't offer any predictive capabilities or root cause analysis. They throw a lot of data if there's a 90% error. You need to check which process is consuming more CPU and determine the root cause for yourself. You need to troubleshoot it manually. This legacy system could introduce predictive analysis and root cause identification. They are reluctant to switch to newer solutions, which may require writing queries to fetch data. Manually logging into servers, checking CPU usage, identifying processes, and determining root causes is time-consuming. Once the root cause is identified, the issue can be resolved efficiently. The manual troubleshooting process is time-consuming. The content is not openly available in the market. If you search for it somewhere, it is not readily accessible. If you want to try it out, no trial version is available. Therefore, it will be challenging to learn. Loading ITRS is difficult, as you need to purchase it first. Secondly, only a few people are knowledgeable about ITRS in the market, making it challenging to find resources. Thirdly, the documentation must be well-documented, making finding content or training material hard. The UI also needs to be updated, which adds to the difficulty.
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

"The flexibility of the product is most valuable. It is highly customizable. If you put your mind to it and think of something you could do, there's a good possibility you can get it integrated within the console, if it's not readily available. The simplicity or ease of customization has been valuable."
"ITRS Geneos provides peace of mind by mentoring our processes and applications."
"I always appreciate Geneos's stability and ease of use."
"Tons of default modules which are available out of the box"
"The ability to build integrations to tools that are not monitored out of the box is the most valuable feature."
"It has helped us re-define the Monitoring operating model which in turn has made support teams more efficient by using features like commented snoozing on various levels, use of knowledgebase articles associated with each alert cell, metric logging for capacity monitoring etc."
"The ability to logically normalize data gathered from multiple types of sources via pre-built plugins is extremely powerful. This functionality, coupled with the ability to import custom data via the Toolkit plugin allows Geneos to be leveraged to monitor every system in the enterprise."
"Geneos enables customized aggregate views and alerts for both related and disparate components, and this flexibility and insight facilitates proactive and prompt causation analysis so you can easily see everything at once and know why there is an issue within seconds rather than spend precious time trying to find out."
"Being able to do your queries from a single location and being able to nest all your monitors within folders is valuable."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."
"System health check monitoring and email alerts after reaching threshold limits."
"I would recommend the product."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
 

Cons

"ITRS Geneos is not on the cloud at a time when everyone is moving to the cloud."
"We sometimes experienced disconnects of the gateways which was a hard one to resolve."
"I would like better access to the data that is being collected."
"ITRS have started to make some major changes that we haven't taken on board yet, in the creation of dashboards and more visibility of the metrics that we collect. At the moment, that's something that's lacking, but I know they have addressed it. Still, it’s not that easy to create stuff to help with visibility and dashboarding in Geneos."
"As far as I know, ITRS does not have integration with any version control system."
"At the moment Geneos is excellent and handling real time monitoring, however not great at doing historical reporting."
"I would like to see ITRS integrate its setup editor with a SVN to check-in setup XML after major changes."
"The main feature that needs work is the Dashboard designer. Currently we have to export metrics data in real-time into some other visualization tools in order to get better picture and have a bit more functional dashboard."
"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."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"May require a dashboard for the data collected"
"OpenText SiteScope has some limitations, especially with integration between OpenText SiteScope and Remedy, which must be done through middle software."
"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive. They have to look at the model around when we move to cloud and how that's going to work. The licensing cost does pay off because of the improvements in support to our business."
"You will get the best price if you get a single global deal."
"When I first came in, their pricing was very high. ITRS had a high expectation of what their price should be based on perceived value. I think they have been realizing, more recently, that there are other competitors, so their pricing is a lot better. Licensing for on-premise is okay, however I feel there is quite some work to be done for cloud and containers. We're still working with them to try and work out what that pricing should look like."
"The licensing cost may seem expensive upfront. However, the service is outstanding, the tool does things that no other tools can do, and the customizability more than makes up for the cost of licensing."
"ITRS Geneos is not a cheap tool. It's a moderate price for the banking industry. The reason we are not able to add the ITRS monitoring tool for the non-banking industries, and non-finance industries, is that the pricing is too high."
"Based on feedback from colleagues and friends working in the financial sector, Geneos is relatively costly. Many companies have been switching from Geneos to Dynatrace, Sysdig, or other monitoring tools in the past two years because of the price."
"Its price is reasonable. It isn't too expensive, and it isn't too cheap, but it also depends on a company's volume and negotiation."
"The market tools are on par with this solution, but if the solution included more features, then it would be well within the range for the cost."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
67%
Computer Software Company
6%
Construction Company
3%
Outsourcing Company
3%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise39
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ITRS Geneos?
The pricing is high. Licensing fees might be around 500$ per server monthly.
What needs improvement with ITRS Geneos?
ITRS Geneos is a legacy system. It predicts or provides proactive measures once an issue is resolved. It doesn't offer any predictive capabilities or root cause analysis. They throw a lot of data i...
What is your primary use case for ITRS Geneos?
ITRS offers multiple products, including upgrades for synthetic monitoring and a SaaS platform. Geneos is used for infrastructure monitoring, covering KPIs such as CPU, memory, processes, network l...
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

Geneos
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ITRS Geneos is used by over 170 financial institutions, including JPMorgan, HSBC, RBS, Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs. Clients range from investment banks to exchanges and brokers.
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about ITRS Geneos vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.