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

AWS Auto Scaling vs OpenText SiteScope 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 SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
21st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
25
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 SiteScope is 0.5%, up from 0.4% 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…
Ahmed Salman - PeerSpot reviewer
Instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence
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. It allows me to create scripts and automate several processes, making tasks simpler and more efficient. By using templates for systems or databases, I can monitor various needs easily, which saves time and increases productivity.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AWS Auto Scaling is very good for managing traffic and creating new instances when necessary."
"The various scaling options available, such as step scaling, are particularly useful."
"Auto Scaling is a cool feature that works well and its automatic scaling capabilities are very useful."
"The solution helps optimize the cost of the AWS environment."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it scales automatically without manual intervention based on the metrics we provide."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to select a minimum amount of active servers so that a new server automatically launches if one fails."
"I would highly recommend Auto Scaling to others because it is a fantastic feature that simplifies scaling processes and makes deployment efficient."
"It efficiently handles traffic, ensuring we are not running expenses and the infrastructure is strong enough to handle the load."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"The tool has capabilities other than managing web-based applications, like URL Monitor and EPI Script. It is also easy to use the tool."
"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 most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."
 

Cons

"The speed of the solution must be improved."
"The setup can be a bit complex in some situations."
"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."
"Flexibility in configuring the workload is missing in AWS Auto Scaling."
"The only area of improvement is the speed at which servers are launched. When cleaning up to six servers at a time, it can take up to 15 to 20 minutes to launch new servers."
"Setting up the configuration involves too much work for the cloud engineer."
"The solution must improve automation."
"The tool must include AI features."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. 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. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."
"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."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is expensive."
"AWS Auto Scaling is an expensive solution."
"AWS Auto Scaling is a pay-per-use and pay-as-you-use service."
"AWS Auto Scaling is a cheap solution."
"AWS Auto Scaling's price is high."
"The product has moderate pricing."
"The pricing is good. I have not had any customers that have complained about the price."
"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."
"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."
"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
"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."
"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."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
34%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 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?
While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues. Overcoming control restrictions for different applications could be improved.
 

Also Known As

AWS Auto-Scaling
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Auto Scaling vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.