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

OpenText SiteScope vs Stackify 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

OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Stackify
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
60th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (66th), Log Management (57th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 1.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Stackify is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText SiteScope1.0%
Stackify0.7%
Other98.3%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone
Proactive monitoring has reduced response time and has improved capacity planning accuracy
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 dashboard user, I do not have any negative feedback. A feature that could be added is direct integration with a ticketing tool, as it would help operation teams directly detect alarms and alerts happening in our infrastructure. Direct integration with a ticketing tool such as Remedy would be a good feature. OpenText SiteScope has some limitations, especially with integration between OpenText SiteScope and Remedy, which must be done through middle software. There are also limitations for cloud monitoring as well as for Docker and Kubernetes.
IE
Senior Software Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Has good filtering and rating features and helps with resource and load management
I've not used Stackify for a while, and I'm currently using a solution now that's not as good as Stackify. Among the solutions I've been using so far, Stackify has been one of the best for me, but there's always room for improvement. For example, I don't know if it's just me, but when I try to get the log from Stackify, sometimes it doesn't appear in real-time. It takes a few minutes before the logs appear. When I redeploy my solution and the application starts, I don't see the logs immediately, and it would take two to three minutes before I see the logs. I don't know if other customers have a similar experience. It's the wait time for the logs to appear that's a concern for me, could be improved, and is what the Stackify team should be looking into. In terms of any additional feature that I'd like added to the solution, I'm not sure if Stackify has a way to export logs out. I've been trying to do it. On the solution, you can click on a spiral-like icon and it shows you the entire error, and I'd prefer an export button that would let me download the error and save that into a text file, for example, so it'll be available on my local machine for me to reference it, especially because the log keeps going and as you're using the solution, the system keeps pushing messages on to Stackify, so if I'm looking at a particular error at 12:05 PM, for example, by the time I go back to my system and would like to revisit the error at 12:25 PM, on Stackify, the logs would have gone past that level and I won't see it again which makes it difficult. When you now go back to that timestamp, you don't tend to see it immediately, but if the solution had an export feature for me to save that particular error information on my local machine for reference at a later time, I won't have to go back to Stackify. I just go to that log, specifically to that particular export that I've received on my local machine. I can get it and review it, and it would be easier that way versus me going back to Stackify to find that particular error and request that particular information.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"SiteScope is deployed on our network perimeter, and gives our operations teams an end user perspective of service availability."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"VM monitoring is pretty good showing good visualizations of how VMs are operating within the context of all the VMs running on the same hypervisor."
"My advice to anyone who wants to use Stackify is to go for it because my experience with it is good."
"What stood out to us were the metrics and granular details we received."
"The deployment is very fast."
"The performance dashboard and the accurate level of details are beneficial."
"Within few hours of install we've identify the source of issue we've been investigating for few days and couldn't pin point."
"The filter feature on Stackify is one of the features I found valuable. It's awesome. When I want to get the application logs, the solution gives me many filters. For example, if I want to get logs from my test environment, the option is there for me to select the environment from Stackify, and you can also select the particular application, and you'll see the information you need there. The filter feature alone and the fact that Stackify offers a lot of different filters is what I like the most about the solution because I've used other tools with the filter feature, but the filtering was very difficult, versus Stackify that has good filtering. On Stackify, you can filter the information by the last one hour, or the last four hours, and you can also select the date range and specify the timestamp, then the solution will give you the information based on the date range you specified. Another feature I found valuable on Stackify is its rating feature because it tells you how your application is faring. For example, a rating of A means excellent, while a rating of F means very bad, or that your application is not doing well at all. The ratings are from A to F. I also like that Stackify helps you in terms of load management because the solution gives you information on overutilized resources. These are the most valuable features of the solution."
"We switched from New Relic and Loggly as it provides us more info at a lower price."
"It is very simple and very easy to configure."
 

Cons

"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."
"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."
"Micro Focus SiteScope is a little slow to load when I go to load it up, and it's not as intuitive as some of the other programs, such as SolarWinds."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."
"Easy to setup, but I’m not able to recommend this product any longer because there hasn’t been any real investment in enhancements that allow for cloud or container monitoring."
"Basically, full automation of the SiS config is not possible, even using HP tools like HP Operations Orchestration, as the application does not allow full configuration of monitor components via the API."
"The search feature could be improved."
"Another improvement would be the agent memory utilization, which led to our recent reevaluation."
"One thing that happens as a new user on Stackify is when you install the agent it pulls everything and if you're not careful, your log allowance will just be exhausted as you are actually pulling too much data."
"When I redeploy my solution and the application starts, I don't see the logs immediately, and it would take two to three minutes before I see the logs."
"I would like to be able to see metrics about individual running containers on the host machines."
"It should be easily scalable and configurable in different instances."
"I'm looking to see more performance tools, but heard that they are going to release some."
"Better mobile support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is a little steep."
"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."
"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."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"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."
"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"The price is variable. It depends on how much data we have received in that particular month. Usually, it goes up to $2,000, or, at times, $3,000 USD per month."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
University
7%
Construction Company
21%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Media Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
MyRacePass, ClearSale, Newitts, Carbonite, Boston Software, Children's International, Starkwood Media Group, Fewzion
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText SiteScope vs. Stackify and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.