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

HaloITSM vs JIRA Service Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 29, 2025

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

HaloITSM
Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)
21st
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
JIRA Service Management
Ranking in IT Service Management (ITSM)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
88
Ranking in other categories
Help Desk Software (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the IT Service Management (ITSM) category, the mindshare of HaloITSM is 2.3%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JIRA Service Management is 7.3%, down from 11.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Service Management (ITSM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
JIRA Service Management7.3%
HaloITSM2.3%
Other90.4%
IT Service Management (ITSM)
 

Featured Reviews

Abhilash Sherkane - PeerSpot reviewer
Practitioner - Service Management at Peristent Systems
An affordable and scalable solution that provides an excellent UI and many out-of-the-box integration capabilities
The product’s UI is very good. The tool’s performance is very good. The overall performance of the tool and the navigation is fast. It is very responsive. It has a lot of out-of-the-box integration capabilities with some of the common tools that we want to integrate. If something is not available out of the box, creating or configuring a new integration on HaloITSM is easier compared to other tools.
Sohaib Ahmad - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President Service Delivery at quixel
Comprehensive workflows and data views have supported complex teams but still need cost improvements
JIRA Service Management is costly. The pricing structure needs improvement. When I add some plugins, I have to pay the cost for every user whether they are using it or not. For smaller companies, the detailed workflow editing and the kind of details that JIRA Service Management provides would be complex. For startups and smaller companies, JIRA Service Management would be complex. The cloud offering is easier because I don't have to manage the infrastructure. There are two templates of the project: company-managed and team-managed. Team-managed is a newer feature, which is good for startup-kind companies where they don't need control over data from multiple projects displaying in one dashboard. For startups, JIRA Service Management is somewhat complex with its schemes and everything. Capacity management should be improved in terms of additional features in the next release of JIRA Service Management.

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 aspect is that is is codeless."
"The solution's initial setup process was quite straightforward... I rate the technical support a nine and a half out of ten."
"The product’s UI is very good."
"It scales well."
"Easy to use and user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of JIRA Service Management is a plugin we are using for the front end for simple user forms."
"We get software developed faster."
"The most valuable features of JIRA Service Management are the service level agreement or management, and the ticketing system. Additionally, there are frequent updates that provide improvements."
"Everyone knows how to use it, so there's no need to teach new members."
"The links between the help desk and Jira issues and between Confluence and Jira issues are most valuable. I can write requirements in Confluence and link them to user stories in Jira and test cases. I can see my test coverage and all that kind of stuff. The integration between these three is very useful. It is pretty customizable, and it integrates well. There are a lot of add-ins and a lot of connectors to third-party products. In my last company, we used Test Royal for managing all the tests, and it integrated perfectly with that. For any issue or bug, we could see what tests have been run and the complete history of the tests."
"This solution has helped us a great deal in project management tracking and forecasting."
 

Cons

"The product does not have its own orchestration engine."
"The solution's integration part needs to improve...In the future release of the solution, I expect to see certain changes in the programming of the solution. A customer of the solution should be able to customize it as per their need."
"There are no improvements needed. There is very little that HALO has not already built that is not on its roadmap."
"JIRA Service Management could improve the forms. When you complete the form for the ticket, for example, to have more information given to the team. If they needed this information, you can give it to them. They need to add additional information for a better understanding of the whole picture of the issue or problem."
"It has change management and incident management, but CMDB is not there. It's also not as user-friendly as ServiceNow."
"The product does not have the capability to sort queued tickets by product. This would be useful in making workflows more efficient."
"Field addition and removal features are not very intuitive in JIRA Service Management."
"This solution lacks features for project management."
"JSD has some analytics, but it's pretty much basic and simple dashboards. There's no mobile application for JSD. It really would benefit from better implementation with other vendors. We're heavily reliant on some external marketplace applications."
"If we can have an easier way to deploy this solution without the help of a consultant and a more reliable way of deploying procedures, it would be quite helpful."
"One thing I would suggest is that before we create an epic, we mention the required stories in its description. Then AI could directly create those stories instead of doing it manually inside the table, so that integration can occur."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's $69 per user per month. Only administrators need a license, and there is no limit to the number of endpoints."
"The product’s pricing is competitive and less complicated."
"The solution's pricing model is good. Also, they still follow the old concurrent licensing method."
"It is one of the premium products on the market, but it is very costly, especially in the Indian market."
"On a scale of one to five, where five is a good price and one is high, I would rate this solution as a three. It isn't cheap but it's not ridiculous."
"JIRA Service Management's pricing is pretty decent compared to competitors. I rate the pricing an eight to nine on a scale of one to ten."
"Buying a software solution is only a half part of the solution (or even less). You need to optimize usage of the software by hiring professionals who will help you to make the most of the software, especially in the beginning."
"I rate Service Management four out of 10 for affordability. The price could be better, especially for companies using more than one Atlassian product. It's suitable for SMBs that can afford it. I don't think there's another tool that's both better and cheaper. All help desk tools are relatively expensive."
"We have paid $20,000 recently for a one-year license for our on-prem server."
"Right now, there are only two of us who are both agents on the help desk and developers. We might be on the free version because we're less than three agents or users. I'm looking at Zephyr tests, which have a $10 a month flat rate, so right now, it is $10 a month. There are lots of add-ons. They do a free version, a standard version, and a premium version. In the last company, we started on $50 a month. By the time I left, we were paying $4,500 a month. That was mainly because we had 100 users on Confluence. I bought an add-on for Jira software for which we had 10 users, and that was $5 per user per month. It was costing me $500 a month, whereas it should only be $50 a month. I don't know if licensing fee has changed. I'd like our whole company to use it, but the big problem is the licensing because the Confluence side is what is really useful, but if I add 30 users to Confluence and then buy an extension for Jira software, I've got to pay for 30 licenses, even though I've only got two users in Jira software. It is the one big disadvantage of cloud software. You always have to pay for the number of seats regardless of which product you are on. This will probably severely limit how many people would use it because I'm not going to start paying $10 per user per month for a Jira software add-on when there are only two people using it."
"I am using the free version, but my clients are paying for it. When they start, they evaluate it for 30 days, and after seeing the value, they move to its paid version."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Service Management (ITSM) solutions are best for your needs.
882,032 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
11%
Government
10%
Healthcare Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise33
 

Also Known As

NetHelpDesk
JIRA Service Desk, Atlassian Jira Service Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Innocent Drinks, SKY TV, Sports Direct, Suzuki, Siemens, NHS, Cardiff City Council, Atos, AO.com, Ambitious about Autism, SEPA, York University etc.
mgm technology partners, Telestream, Build.com, Zend Technologies, OfficeDrop, PGS Software, American Diabetes Association, NEPTUNE Canada
Find out what your peers are saying about HaloITSM vs. JIRA Service Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,032 professionals have used our research since 2012.