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
6.0
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
18th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of AWS Auto Scaling is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AWS Auto Scaling0.4%
OpenText SiteScope0.8%
Other98.8%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Ishaka Michael Efe - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer Intern at HNG Tech
Automation has simplified traffic management and improved workload efficiency
I'm not really sure what improvements I would want to see in AWS Auto Scaling because I haven't really used it extensively or explored most of it. To the extent that I've used it so far, I think it is very good. I can't really say for certain what should be improved because I haven't really explored it a lot. However, what I've been using it for has been very good. If there could be training for AWS Auto Scaling, that would be fine. If you could add more training on how to use it correctly and on the functions that I haven't used before or some people have not really used before, that would help. If there could be more documentation and training on it, that would be beneficial.
Gyanesh Rahatekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Back office at Reliance Industries Ltd
Achieve seamless incident response with valuable monitoring capabilities and reliable alerts
There are multiple features related to OpenText SiteScope monitoring that I have found to be very useful, such as SSL monitoring. If SSL is present as a file in a server, then OpenText SiteScope is a very effective tool to monitor when that certificate expires. It provides comprehensive information related to SSL certificates and log monitoring. If any kind of required keyword monitoring is present in the log file, OpenText SiteScope has excellent functionality for monitoring. It is very easy to configure and obtain the correct information related to end-user requirements. The agentless monitoring feature of OpenText SiteScope is particularly impressive and easy to configure and gather information from. According to the operations team perspective, there is no impact related to resource management from the agentless monitoring. It demonstrates very low resource consumption related to its functionality.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The setup is not very complex."
"The various scaling options available, such as step scaling, are particularly useful."
"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."
"AWS Auto Scaling is very good for managing traffic and creating new instances when necessary."
"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."
"The good thing about Autoscaling is that it provides the capacity to minimize downtime. So, it gives you the assurance of stability and robustness within your system."
"When a lot of traffic comes into our organization, the product scales our instances based on our environment’s requirements."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"The products have been able to deliver the service to our business, which is to ensure that the applications that depend on our servers are always available."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"I would rate the stability of OpenText SiteScope as excellent."
 

Cons

"The tool must include AI features."
"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."
"It could be cheaper."
"The product’s security features need improvement."
"Setting up the configuration involves too much work for the cloud engineer."
"If there could be training for AWS Auto Scaling, that would be fine. If you could add more training on how to use it correctly and on the functions that I haven't used before or some people have not really used before, that would help."
"Setting up the configuration involves too much work for the cloud engineer, like configuring the ALB, the target group, and all the steps."
"It has latency issues. It depends on the distribution used, whether it's Amazon Linux, Windows Linux, etc. Occasionally, there are latency issues, which might lead to slower performance."
"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."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities. Currently there's one for Amazon."
"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."
"There is a need to enhance the reporting feature in OpenText SiteScope. Reporting related to performance information for historical data needs improvement to provide better reporting related to application availability and end node availability."
"The interface of OpenText SiteScope needs improvement. It has a Java-based interface, which is slow and could be simplified for better usability."
"Sometimes in a huge environment, I think the documentation does not provide the required calculations so you can't know what the required set up should be. You need to test."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AWS Auto Scaling's price is high."
"The pricing is good. I have not had any customers that have complained about the price."
"AWS Auto Scaling is a pay-per-use and pay-as-you-use service."
"AWS Auto Scaling is a cheap solution."
"AWS Auto Scaling is an expensive solution."
"The product has moderate pricing."
"The product is expensive."
"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."
"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."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Educational Organization
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Performing Arts
7%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
University
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise21
 

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?
I'm not sure about the pricing aspect of AWS Auto Scaling or the cost of it.
What needs improvement with AWS Auto Scaling?
I'm not really sure what improvements I would want to see in AWS Auto Scaling because I haven't really used it extensively or explored most of it. To the extent that I've used it so far, I think it...
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?
Regarding areas for improvement, there may be minor issues, but I have not faced any significant issues with OpenText SiteScope because I have a team that uses this product daily. As a monitoring d...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
OpenText SiteScope has a lot of use cases including monitoring websites, monitoring URLs, monitoring infrastructure resources like CPU, hard disk, and memory usage, and customized monitoring script...
 

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: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.