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

Azure Monitor 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

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (3rd)
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
18th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 4.9%, down from 8.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Azure Monitor4.9%
OpenText SiteScope0.6%
Other94.5%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Muhammad Usman Khawar - PeerSpot reviewer
Native integration simplifies monitoring but documentation and cost improvements are needed
The ease of access in Azure is significant since it's native to the platform and easy to integrate. It has no maintenance overhead, and users don't have to navigate to another portal to get their desired result. It's the handiness that it has, rather than the features. The interpretation from the logs and injection requires custom runbooks. While it's complex, many services provide native insights and workbooks. It does the basic job quite efficiently. They added new kinds of metrics with more integrations to send out metrics. They have even added support for third-party tools that can be integrated. Azure Monitor is working on improvements and becoming more mature. Azure Monitor is stable and scalable. Azure Monitor is evolving with new workbooks and dashboards.
Gyanesh Rahatekar - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"One of the most useful aspects of this solution is the out-of-the-box functionality on all areas, especially on Application Insights, zero instrumentation, and artificial intelligence for event correlation."
"The security and support are good."
"A product that is well-integrated for monitoring Microsoft Azure."
"It's a Microsoft native tool, so it works well with other Microsoft technologies, which is predominantly what our customer end-user base is."
"The solution has tons of valuable features."
"It has good troubleshooting features."
"Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs."
"Among the valuable features of this solution, Application Insights stands out as one of the most significant. It provides insights into application performance and helps identify issues and bottlenecks."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
"I would rate the stability of OpenText SiteScope as excellent."
"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 can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
 

Cons

"Integration with third-party tools from other vendors than Azure is more time-consuming"
"It's really complex to retrieve or query the logs in Azure Monitor."
"The cost skyrockets once you start using it, and there are complaints that the actual cost of the Kubernetes cluster was less than the cost they were incurring for Azure Monitor."
"The process of implementation needs to be easier."
"The scalability could be improved as there are some limitations."
"The query builder could be better. In comparison to other monitoring tools, in order to use Azure Monitor, your engineers need to have KQL experience. If they don't, it's not intuitive as a system."
"The monitoring of Kubernetes clusters needs improvement to be on par with competitors."
"Although it's not always the case, the price can sometimes get expensive. This depends on a number of factors, such as how many services you are trying to integrate with Azure Monitor and how much storage they're consuming each month (for example, how large are the log files?)."
"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."
"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."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."
"The interface of OpenText SiteScope needs improvement. It has a Java-based interface, which is slow and could be simplified for better usability."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Azure Monitor is a low-priced solution, which is why it would work best on small-scale projects."
"The licensing is a monthly fee."
"The product offers a pay-as-you-go model to users. The charges are to be paid according to the usage of the product."
"My company is okay with the current pricing of the solution."
"The cost of Azure Monitor application performance should be less expensive."
"The tool is expensive."
"Azure Monitor's price is minimal to the point of being almost negligible."
"It is a pay-as-you-go model. I find it very cost-effective."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"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."
"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."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"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.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What do you like most about Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment.
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
The challenges with Azure Monitor are that it's initially complex to set up because you need multiple components. Azure Monitor is one thing, but within Azure Monitor, you need to bring Log Analyti...
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?
The new version D2 has improved with a smart plan UI interface. However, while still using the classic WebTop UI, it looks outdated and not HTML5 compatible. They are currently in progress to migra...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.