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

Amazon CloudWatch vs OpenText Business Process Monitoring 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

Amazon CloudWatch
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (14th), Cloud Monitoring Software (10th)
OpenText Business Process M...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
30th
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 April 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Amazon CloudWatch is 1.6%, up from 1.1% 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

Rasanpreet Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable AWS monitoring and logging
The choice of logging solution should always be determined by the specific business requirements. It is crucial to align the logging strategy with what type of logs are needed and how they should be used. There are instances where we require custom solutions to retrieve logs, especially application logs that may not be easily accessible through CloudWatch or similar services. When we heavily rely on AWS native services, CloudWatch is indeed a robust choice. However, in certain scenarios, we might need integration capabilities with other tools, and if they can incorporate such features, it would enhance overall logging capabilities. I would rate it eight out of ten.
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

"CloudWatch provides essential monitoring capabilities that integrate seamlessly with other AWS services."
"The solution gives us very good real-time data."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon CloudWatch is collecting the logs from Lambda."
"We use Amazon CloudWatch for logging."
"Amazon CloudWatch's best feature stems from its ability to monitor app performance."
"The monitoring feature is valuable."
"The alarms are one thing I love about AWS CloudWatch. It has alerts that notify us when resource use is approaching the limit."
"Amazon CloudWatch is a cheap and easy-to-use solution."
"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."
"The tool team was sort of aware of those tools to deal with. And, that helped us to deliver the project on time."
 

Cons

"Adding conditional expressions would enhance its functionality."
"CloudWatch's scalability could be improved."
"Amazon CloudWatch charges extra for custom metrics, which is a significant disadvantage."
"Maybe Amazon Web Services can improve by providing a library for CloudWatch with some useful features."
"The product's configuration has some challenges. The solution needs to be more user-friendly."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing, because they have a premium version, but it's not really a premium version. It's just an enhanced monitoring version, and it can be a bit expensive depending on your usage."
"Amazon CloudWatch's pricing needs improvement."
"There could be further enhancements through CloudWatch's partnerships."
"It doesn't have SNMP, the standard communication protocol for sending alerts."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its pricing is reasonable. It is sometimes tricky, but it is reasonable as compared to others."
"What's were using is the free service of Amazon CloudWatch, so they're not charging us. As for hidden fees, we're not aware of them because we're using what our clients provided us."
"The price is okay for me."
"Amazon CloudWatch is a cheap solution."
"The tool is not expensive."
"The pricing model is pay-as-you-go so you have to be mindful of usage to manage costs."
"The price of Amazon CloudWatch is reasonable. When the rate of data collection is done the price will increase. The price is less than other solutions."
"It is a free-of-charge service."
"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.
848,476 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon CloudWatch?
Amazon CloudWatch charges more for custom metrics as well as for changes in the timeline, which I see as a disadvantage given the price.
What needs improvement with Amazon CloudWatch?
Amazon CloudWatch charges extra for custom metrics, which is a significant disadvantage. Another aspect that needs improvement is the look and feel of custom dashboards, which currently do not matc...
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...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Business Process Monitor, HPE Business Process Monitor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AirAsia, Airbnb, Aircel, APUS, Avazu, Casa & Video, Futbol Club Barcelona (FCBarcelona), National Taiwan University, redBus
United Airlines, Vodafone Ireland, TEB, The Australian Red Cross Blood Service
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon CloudWatch vs. OpenText Business Process Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,476 professionals have used our research since 2012.