IBM Application Performance Management vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category. IBM is ranked #51 with an average rating of 7.0, while OpenText is ranked #21 with an average rating of 8.0. IBM holds a 0.3% mindshare in APM, compared to OpenText’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 62% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Application Performance...

Read 7 IBM Application Performance Management reviews

852 Views
550 Comparison Views

62% willing to recommend

OpenText SiteScope

Read 25 OpenText SiteScope reviews

1,554 Views
754 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

IBM Application Performance...

OpenText SiteScope

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

OpenText SiteScope and IBM Application Performance Management are both well-regarded tools in IT operations management. OpenText SiteScope seems to have an upper hand in intuitive setup and better value for smaller teams, whereas IBM Application Performance Management offers richer features and better scalability for larger enterprises.

What features are offered by OpenText SiteScope in comparison to IBM Application Performance Management?

OpenText SiteScope provides extensive monitoring capabilities, ease of configuration, and better value for smaller teams. IBM Application Performance Management offers comprehensive performance tracking, advanced analytics, and deep integrations with predictive insights.

What areas of improvement can be found in OpenText SiteScope in comparison to IBM Application Performance Management?

OpenText SiteScope requires a more modern dashboard, better reporting capabilities, and enhancements in user experience. IBM Application Performance Management needs to address the complexity of its software, reduce the steep learning curve, and improve user-friendliness.

How is the ease of deployment and customer service of OpenText SiteScope in comparison to IBM Application Performance Management?

OpenText SiteScope offers straightforward deployment and responsive customer service. IBM Application Performance Management, although more complex to deploy, offers comprehensive support resources to help navigate its complexity.

What setup costs and ROI can be seen with OpenText SiteScope in comparison to IBM Application Performance Management?

OpenText SiteScope is considered more cost-effective with better initial ROI for small to mid-sized businesses. IBM Application Performance Management, though pricier, provides a superior long-term ROI due to its advanced features and scalability, justifying the investment for large-scale implementations.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Application Performance Management vs. OpenText SiteScope Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Application Performance Management vs. OpenText SiteScope

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 848,253 peers since 2012

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

IBM Application Performance...

Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

51st

Average Rating

6.4

Reviews Sentiment

5.9

Number of Reviews

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

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 IBM Application Performance Management is 0.3%, down from 0.4% 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

Daniel Tamiru

Manager, Database & System Administration at Awash International Bank

A multi-functional solution but has poor stability and performance-related issues

We are using version 4 of IBM Application Performance Management, and it is deployed on-premises. We use it for internet banking and mainly for application performance on-site. For example, if we face performance-related issues in one of our software or managed services, we use this solution to…

Read full review

Ahmed Salman

Performance & Monitoring Supervisor at Saudi Telecom Company

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The transaction tracking feature from IBM is the most important feature for us. It is something that provides a terrific value for us and our clients. It has a lot of data sources and agents that are collectors. It is also stable."

"It's easy to use."

"IBM Application Performance Management helped us increased our response time by 80% and cost 60% less."

"The most valuable feature is the breakdown that it provides, such as a description of the fields for a particular transaction."

"I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten."

"Because we have partnerships with other partners, I can share a bit about what I've noticed with IBM APM compared to other vendor solutions. Specifically, with IBM, the visibility into detailed process information is more tangible. On the OS level, APM displays all processes (or the top 10 processes) that are consuming CPU or resident memory. This is the most important thing that is not always available with other vendors."

"The initial setup was straightforward and took minimal effort."

"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."

"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."

"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."

"There's no agent you need installed on the servers. In our environment, we have some servers out of our control so we cannot manage them. We use SiteScope to monitor the availability, the resources on the servers, etc. This allows us to do this job without installing agents so there's no need to take care of anything on the server."

"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."

"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."

"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."

"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."

More OpenText SiteScope pros

Cons

"Technical support can be slow and needs improvement."

"The demo that was provided to us is not working very well. At times, there are errors."

"It's still missing some platforms. For example, if you look to applications itself, it is missing the interface."

"The stability is not great and should be better."

"They should focus on potentially enhancing the dashboard to make it more contemporary and adding some customization options. Furthermore, there might be room for improvement in the pricing policy."

"Its web user interface is a little bit old in comparison to other solutions, such as New Relic, and it should be improved. Its scalability and technical support should also be improved. Currently, it is scalable, but only in a vertical way. They provide good technical support, but the initial steps for a new case can be improved to fasten the resolution process."

"With APM, we noticed that the agent can cause a lot of issues for the application, making the agent very unreliable. Many issues are happening, and we've had to discuss it with support to try and get a fix. It affects application availability, and sometimes actions fail because of the agent, degrading the performance of the application."

"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."

"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."

"Direct integration with an SMS gateway for sending critical alerts to the support SME. This will help customer investing in third party middleware solutions for SMS."

"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."

"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."

"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."

"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."

"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."

More OpenText SiteScope cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As I previously indicated, I initiated the IBM and uncovered all its elements. Consequently, I'm not inclined towards a licensing approach."

"IBM APM is one of the cheaper products on the market, while everything necessary to get started is included in the license."

"The licensing fees can be paid every six months or on a yearly basis."

"Licensing is a little steep."

"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."

"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."

"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."

"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."

"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."

"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."

"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."

More OpenText SiteScope pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

28%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

10%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

34%

Manufacturing Company

18%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Application Performance Management?

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Application Performance Management?

They should focus on potentially enhancing the dashboard to make it more contemporary and adding some customization options. Furthermore, there might be room for improvement in the pricing policy. ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for IBM Application Performance Management?

I monitor business applications for more than four end users.

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?

The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

Instana Dynamic APM vs IBM Application Performance Management

Compared 36% of the time

BMC Compuware Strobe vs IBM Application Performance Management

Compared 21% of the time

Splunk AppDynamics vs IBM Application Performance Management

Compared 13% of the time

Datadog vs IBM Application Performance Management

Compared 13% of the time

IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager vs IBM Application Performance Management

Compared 9% of the time

More IBM Application Performance Management Competitors

Dynatrace vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 14% of the time

Grafana vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 13% of the time

Splunk AppDynamics vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 13% of the time

Prometheus Group vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 12% of the time

OmniPeek vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 11% of the time

More OpenText SiteScope Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

April 2025

IBM Application Performance Management report

Download IBM Application Performance Management product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText SiteScope

March 2025

Download OpenText SiteScope product report

Also Known As

IBM APM

Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope

Overview

The IBM Application Performance Management portfolio provides visibility, control and automation of your mission-critical applications. It helps pinpoint the root cause of application's issue more quickly and resolve the problem. The integrated capabilities cover the five key areas: discovery, end-use experience, transaction tracking, enterprise diagnostics and analytics. It also easily monitors applications to ensure optimal performance to extend your hybrid management environment capabilities, to measure the customer experience from multiple locations and to further eliminate blind spots in your application environment.

IBM

OpenText SiteScope is an agentless monitoring program that tracks the availability and performance of distributed IT infrastructures such as servers, network devices and services, applications and application components, virtualization software, operating systems, and other IT enterprise components.

OpenText SiteScope is an autonomous hybrid IT monitoring system that can monitor more than 100 different types of IT components in real time, thanks to a lightweight and highly customizable remote access architecture.

With OpenText SiteScope, IT teams can get the data they need to keep on top of problems and eliminate bottlenecks before they become major concerns.

OpenText SiteScope can reduce total cost of ownership (TCO) by utilizing agentless technology, which eliminates the need to install and monitor agents on each box. Manual activities can be automated, and teams can save time and effort by using pre-packaged solution templates.

OpenText SiteScope Features

OpenText SiteScope has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

Broad functionality built on expertise: OpenText SiteScope's architecture is scalable and supports a broad range of functions, including data collecting, alerting, event management, and reporting. Data is collected via remote access, which eliminates the need for agents to be deployed and maintained on monitored nodes. OpenText SiteScope connects to systems as a remote user via the central server, which supports JMX, SNMP, HTTP, SSH, NetBIOS, and WMI.

Monitors legacy and modern environments: OpenText SiteScope comes with more than 100 built-in monitors that track things like utilization, response time, use, and resource availability.
- Cloud: You can monitor virtual servers and applications on Amazon Web Services (AWS). AWS-hosted applications can provide data to Amazon CloudWatch, which can be used for auto-scaling, reporting, and alerting.
- Virtualization: OpenText SiteScope supports VMware, Microsoft, Citrix, and Oracle/Sun virtualization technologies. Monitor Docker clusters, nodes, containers, and workloads.

Flexibility with configuration: By adding or deleting specific monitors, you can adapt to dynamic changes in data center configuration.

Templates for solutions: The template database is based on best practices for monitoring complex application settings with the least amount of time and effort. The templates include built-in domain experience of specialized monitors, default metrics and thresholds, proactive testing, and best practices for a given application or monitoring component.

Notifications, alerts, and reports: Email, SNMP traps, HTTP post, and database alerts are all supported. Administrators receive alerts based on defined thresholds and schedules.

Flexibility in user management: Using LDAP or an internal management solution, define group-level permissions, construct user roles, and assign security groups depending on role. Extensive WS (Web Service)-based API that automates numerous management situations without the need for the SiteScope UI.

Integrations with SiteScope: OpenText SiteScope not only offers a number of benefits on its own, but it can also be linked with a number of OpenText and third-party solutions, giving teams the ability to properly integrate their IT operations center.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Mibtree, EatDrinkDeals.com, IT Performance Advisor

Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank

Buyer's Guide

IBM Application Performance Management vs. OpenText SiteScope

April 2025

Free Report: IBM Application Performance Management vs. OpenText SiteScope

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Application Performance Management vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

848,253 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Application Performance Management vs. OpenText SiteScope report.

See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.

We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.