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

OmniPeek vs OpenText Business Process Monitoring 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

OmniPeek
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
65th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (74th)
OpenText Business Process M...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
29th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of OmniPeek is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Business Process Monitoring is 0.1%, down from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Vinal-Patel - PeerSpot reviewer
Real-time analytics and alerts improve application performance and network operations
OmniPeek's ability to convert application visibility into flow helps me quickly understand application performance over LAN, WAN, or wireless. Its real-time analytics, integrated with LiveNX ( /products/liveaction-livenx-reviews ), allow me to monitor business-critical applications and set up alerts for application performance issues. This centralized dashboard and alert system is highly valuable for maintaining network operations.
AD
Implementation is quite easy, synthetic monitoring transactions in place and good elements report-wise
The current challenges surprised me. It doesn't support the latest versions of SNMP(at the time of writing), the standard communication protocol for sending alerts. It's still using SNMP version one, which surprised everyone and required extra processes from the security team. Fortunately, we're not sending sensitive data, so we were able to get sign-off. Otherwise, it could have been more challenging. We expected them to use the standard SNMP version three protocol. Real-time analytics comes up during certain calls, but again, Micro Focus has only mentioned that. They have their own tool as well for implementing. So we had a few calls on that side. It’s all more customer-driven. That is still under discussion, and we haven’t gone much into that yet. But, real-time is something the team is interested in, but at the moment, there are various challenges in terms of funding and things like that. Reports can be enhanced further. There are tools like Grafana, and since I've been part of this process, I appreciate this product. But there are debates about why we can't implement Grafana in the future. There are also discussions about real user monitoring versus synthetic monitoring, and which is better. The interface could be improved; I'd rate it a seven out of ten. This is where it can be also improved. We also faced challenges installing the BPM packages. We eventually got support, but there are situations now where many companies don’t want third parties to come and install the software. They want their own IT team to install these BPMs because they don’t want to give root-level privileges due to security constraints. So, the installation package manuals can be improved a little bit so that any team, whether from Intel or any support team, can understand and install those BPMs. The installation package manuals could be improved so any team can understand and install the VPNs. Monitoring, especially during configuration, can also be enhanced. There are various levels of configurations, and the documentation could be improved. I think AI is everywhere. So, it is something bad at the moment. There are initiatives, but still not visible. There is background work happening, and a few teams are working on those things. But, it is still not visible yet like what level of automation possibilities there are. Various software like UiPath and RPA, robotic process automation, but it’s not really materialized to the full extent. It’s still early stage.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek was the ability it gave us to see the connection procedure."
"I believe the most crucial feature of OmniPeek search is the ability to sniff packets based on channel switching."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek is the ability to assign custom color codes to the different packets easily."
"OmniPeek's ability to convert application visibility into flow helps me quickly understand application performance over LAN, WAN, or wireless."
"It's a solid piece of software. It's stable."
"The most valuable features are the voice bot, which checks the quality of service for voice, and the expert view that gives me insight on what and where to troubleshoot."
"The most valuable feature is OmniPeek is user-friendly."
"The tool team was sort of aware of those tools to deal with. And, that helped us to deliver the project on time."
"The stability has been very good over the years."
"Automates processes and allows reports and statistics to improve the speed at which changes and assets are managed."
 

Cons

"I am not using OmniPeek for automation, we only do manual testing. Automation testing is tedious to do. The automation should be more user-friendly. I have exposed some APIs but the usage is not user-friendly."
"Making it more clear on how to configure the filters, or really automating them, would be an improvement."
"I would like to see the saving feature improved. We have had issues if you do not save your progress then you have to start from the beginning."
"I would like to see the tool work in an open environment the same as how it does in a closed environment."
"I don't see a clear roadmap in the future for improving this software."
"The solution's automation has room for improvement."
"Product documentation is lacking, and sometimes, incorrect. Having better documentation will allow business analysts and data center personnel to rely on the Micro Focus help desk less."
"The solution should offer better integration with other tools from a service management perspective."
"It doesn't have SNMP, the standard communication protocol for sending alerts."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are different types of licenses available."
"We have only purchased the add-on once and have not paid for any subsequent versions as it was too costly for us."
"The pricing for this solution could be improved, as it is a very expensive product."
"On a three-year license package, it was a good deal."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
850,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Educational Organization
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
University
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Micro Focus Business Process Monitor?
Synthetic Monitoring is a very good capability as we can simulate the end-user interaction with the application and proactively we can discover issues before the real end users are impacted.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Business Process Monitor?
The current challenges surprised me. It doesn't have SNMP, the standard communication protocol for sending alerts. It's still using SNMP version one, which surprised everyone and required extra pro...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Business Process Monitor?
We wanted to have synthetic monitoring transactions in place, and we have used it for a while with previous tools. It’s basically Topaz or HP, then Micro Focus, and now it’s OpenText. We used it fo...
 

Also Known As

Savvius OmniPeek
Micro Focus Business Process Monitor, HPE Business Process Monitor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Apcon, Aruba Networks, Avaya Inc., Cisco Systems, Ekahau, Gigamon Systems, HP, IBM, IXIA, Meru Networks, Napatech, NextComputing, Procera Networks, Qualcomm Atheros, Ralink Technology Corporation, Telchemy
United Airlines, Vodafone Ireland, TEB, The Australian Red Cross Blood Service
Find out what your peers are saying about OmniPeek vs. OpenText Business Process Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.