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

OpenText SiteScope vs SCOM 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

OpenText SiteScope
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (31st)
SCOM
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (4th), Network Monitoring Software (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

OpenText SiteScope and SCOM aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. OpenText SiteScope is designed for Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability and holds a mindshare of 0.5%, up 0.4% compared to last year.
SCOM, on the other hand, focuses on Event Monitoring, holds 8.9% mindshare, up 8.6% since last year.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
Event Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

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.
MarcMermuys - PeerSpot reviewer
Has efficient monitoring with robust integration capabilities
We use SCOM to configure different monitors using several management packs. It integrates systems like Active Directory and correlates them, and it is used for monitoring and managing systems SCOM allows integration of several systems, providing correlation between different systems such as…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"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."
"I would rate the stability of OpenText SiteScope as excellent."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"The system is really powerful; instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence."
"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."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"This solution saves us a lot of work because it reduces the effort that is required in order to start monitoring."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"The solution's reporting engine has given me detailed information on which applications or services I've either failed or about to fail in terms of the predictive makeup on Azure cloud."
"I like some of their newer features, such as maintenance schedules, because SCOM records SLA and SLO time."
"The inbuilt management pack that Microsoft provides is really helpful. I know it's a mature product, and they keep upgrading the management pack."
"It is very good at monitoring Microsoft Server."
 

Cons

"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
"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."
"There is a need to enhance the reporting feature in OpenText SiteScope. Reporting related to performance information for historical data needs improvement to provide better reporting related to application availability and end node availability."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"They can focus more on cloud monitoring instead of on-premise monitoring. We should be able to monitor cloud-related applications. They can include this feature in the next release. If it is in the cloud, we can have scalability by using Kubernetes. The container is containerized, packaged, and managed using Kubernetes. This feature is not there in SCOM. Going forward, if they can focus on that, it will be great."
"The solution should have more tools for monitoring the cloud engine versus on-premise."
"The configurations could be better. There are multiple tests where you can do something, but they can be a trigger as well. The overriding methodologies are not that easy. The configurations are difficult. The configuration and thorough day-to-day operations to get them to the level you want takes some time. It's very difficult."
"I would like more customized reports. People should have some customization option on the dashboards for whenever they put multiple lists into it. Beyond customizing the content, there should be the ability to customize the colors so that they can engage some priority and mark challenges separately."
"The solution should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
"They could provide better dashboards, detailed logs, and reports crucial for monitoring services in real-time."
"It'll help if they can provide real-time or closer to real-time monitoring."
"​I would like to better be able to monitor Oracle processes.​"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"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."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"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."
"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."
"We have an EA with Microsoft, and it comes as part of the EA."
"Two customers bought the enterprise agreement with Microsoft and paid for Software Assurance. But few customers don't buy it for Software Assurance. They just buy it and deploy it, and they think that we will be using it for the next five years."
"SCOM is part of the System Center suite and I am satisfied with the pricing."
"The platform is cost-effective due to our existing Microsoft support."
"Our licensing fees are approximately $30 per user, per month."
"The pricing and licensing are fair."
"I don't know the exact cost because it's managed by our sales team, but Microsoft is on the higher side."
"If you have a Microsoft Enterprise Agreement, then this is part of the agreement."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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 interface of OpenText SiteScope needs improvement. It has a Java-based interface, which is slow and could be simplified for better usability.
What do you like most about SCOM?
The tool helps to monitor Windows servers. It offers alerts from a central location.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SCOM?
I am not aware of the exact pricing as it is managed by my supervisor. As an academic institution, we receive substantial discounts.
What needs improvement with SCOM?
SCOM is likely to be phased out in favor of more compatible tools like Icinga ( /products/icinga-reviews ) for application monitoring or when moving to cloud solutions like CloudWatch and Azure ( /...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
System Center Operations Manager, SCOM 2012
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Dialog Telekom
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, Splunk and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.