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

Avada Software Infrared360 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

Avada Software Infrared360
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
77th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (5th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (11th), Server Monitoring (36th)
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 Avada Software Infrared360 is 0.1%, 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

it_user685326 - PeerSpot reviewer
An offsite team performs a daily infrastructure health check and sends reports to the technical/management teams.
Administration, Monitoring, and Delegation are the most valuable features of the solution. * Administration: It provides a centralized audit trail of all the infrastructure changes. * Monitoring: It gives the ability to integrate with my company's global notification system, and the ability to proactively automate corrective actions. * Delegation: It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams.
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

"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."
"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"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

"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"Some of the graphics in the interface could be improved. It's pretty basic. Some interfaces are not up to what you're used to seeing on other, more Windows-like tools."
"One area where they could improve is with their documentation. Some sections are not up to date with new release information and providing additional samples in some areas would be very helpful."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"The UI can be cumbersome - but we are still using the Viper interface and we have not had the time to check out the Alloy interface which is supposed to be much improved."
"We are still working with the FTE/MFT subscription monitoring and reporting functionality. That is an area in which we would like to see further development taking place."
"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

"Our internal budget calculation model incorporates the pricing per endpoint for any new projects. However, as our footprint for distributed queue managers shrinks as part of our shared middleware hub deployment, the initial licensing and support costs have been reduced over the last five years."
"Start small, then increase licensing later as per your demand."
"Because the licensing is at the QMGR level, you need to have at least a small cushion of licenses for occasional enterprise needs."
"Avada Software's licensing metric is very good because the license fees are based on the number of connections (which have not increased for us very much over the years) rather than the CPU processing power (which increases significantly whenever our hardware is upgraded) or the number of users (which has increased for us a lot since our original purchase)."
"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
Financial Services Firm
41%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Hospitality Company
5%
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

Infrared360
Micro Focus Business Process Monitor, HPE Business Process Monitor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

USBank, Southwest Airlines, Visiting Nurse Services of New York, Aon Hewitt, Parker Hannifin,  Cantonal Bank of Zurich (ZKB), Hagemeyer NA, and many others
United Airlines, Vodafone Ireland, TEB, The Australian Red Cross Blood Service
Find out what your peers are saying about Avada Software Infrared360 vs. OpenText Business Process Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,476 professionals have used our research since 2012.