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

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
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Stackify
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
61st
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (59th), Log Management (61st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Stackify is 0.2%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

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.
Kalyan Somisetty - PeerSpot reviewer
Simple, easy to configure, and offers trial versions
In the next version, which I want to try, it'll show the comparison of the old responses of the APS. For example, how much time the old response and the new response with the changes. Right now, I cannot differentiate. The graphical interface should be able to capture nicely how much time it has taken and it should be very clear. Sometimes it confuses us. For example, what is this APA for? What were the average responses and how many requests have happened? It needs to give a clear picture. They should enable request and response capturing in the Stackify user interface to show what the request for the APA is. Then, it'll be very good. It should be able to capture the payload. For example, what is the request and what is the response? If it has a nice way of capturing everything then it would be easy. There is no need of using ELK again for logging. As of now, people will use Stackify or maybe Grafana for seeing the stats of the application or responses, however, it doesn't have the capabilities to show everything. People will go for any exception handling or checking the request and response in the ELK. If Stackify can do this future, then it'll be an easier single tool. It is anyway intercepting the logs, application logs. I don't think it's a big matter to capture extra data with the requested response. That requested response capturing also should be configurable since some people want the question response to be captured and for the people that don't want it, we can use that feature. It can be enabled as desired. Many people are using different monitoring tools like ELK, LogStash, and Splunk - many other tools. However, if you can make this kind of performance tool cover everything, then they will not shift to other solutions. It should be easily scalable and configurable in different instances. For example, if the same application is scaled up to differently, it should be easily integrable into Kubernetes pipelines. They should offer plugins to make it more easily integratable. For development enrollment, it should be free to use.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"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."
"I would rate the stability of OpenText SiteScope as excellent."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"The performance dashboard and the accurate level of details are beneficial."
"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."
"The deployment is very fast."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"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."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"It should be easily scalable and configurable in different instances."
"The search feature could be improved."
"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."
"I would like to be able to see metrics about individual running containers on the host machines."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"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."
"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."
"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
"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 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.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
9%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
9%
Media Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

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 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...
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: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.