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

AWS Auto Scaling 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

AWS Auto Scaling
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
15th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
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 AWS Auto Scaling 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

Mbula Mboma - PeerSpot reviewer
Boosts deployment efficiency with seamless automatic scaling capabilities
My primary use case for Auto Scaling is mainly to deploy applications at scale Auto Scaling has made the deployment of applications more efficient, allowing us to manage traffic and maintain performance as user counts increase. Auto Scaling is a cool feature that works well and its automatic…
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

"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it scales automatically without manual intervention based on the metrics we provide."
"AWS Auto Scaling is very good for managing traffic and creating new instances when necessary."
"It can scale."
"The solution's monitoring effectively monitors our application and CPU utilization."
"I like the graphs provided by the tool."
"The various scaling options available, such as step scaling, are particularly useful."
"The tool gives you the flexibility to scale up and grow. The solution is also fast to deploy."
"AWS Auto Scaling is cost-effective and very useful for businesses."
"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

"The setup can be a bit complex in some situations."
"We can have more auto scaling algorithms implemented in AWS Auto Scaling."
"The solution's infrastructure scalability and elasticity could be improved."
"Flexibility in configuring the workload is missing in AWS Auto Scaling."
"The speed of the solution must be improved."
"The solution is not out-of-the-box and you have to study to use it. It should be more easier to use."
"AWS Auto Scaling's documentation could be better."
"It is sometimes very critical to deploy on AWS since some servers are already running in the background. There are challenges for employees on how to deploy at a given time."
"The solution should offer better integration with other tools from a service management perspective."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AWS Auto Scaling is a pay-per-use and pay-as-you-use service."
"AWS Auto Scaling is an expensive solution."
"The product is expensive."
"The pricing is good. I have not had any customers that have complained about the price."
"AWS Auto Scaling is a cheap solution."
"AWS Auto Scaling's price is high."
"The product has moderate pricing."
"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.
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about AWS Auto Scaling?
The tool's most valuable feature is vertical auto-scaling, which is easy to use. However, most companies now prefer horizontal scaling. I set up the health check integration to monitor CPU usage. W...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Auto Scaling?
The pricing of Auto Scaling is medium range, neither high nor low.
What needs improvement with AWS Auto Scaling?
It is sometimes very critical to deploy on AWS since some servers are already running in the background. There are challenges for employees on how to deploy at a given time. It requires a downtime ...
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

 

Also Known As

AWS Auto-Scaling
Micro Focus Business Process Monitor, HPE Business Process Monitor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
United Airlines, Vodafone Ireland, TEB, The Australian Red Cross Blood Service
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Auto Scaling vs. OpenText Business Process Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,476 professionals have used our research since 2012.