Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Google and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category. Google is ranked #32 with an average rating of 10.0, while OpenText is ranked #15 with an average rating of 9.2. Google holds a 0.9% mindshare in APM, compared to OpenText’s 1.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Google users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Google Cloud's operations s...

Read 10 Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) reviews

5,990 Views
3,774 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText SiteScope

Read 29 OpenText SiteScope reviews

6,368 Views
5,986 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Google Cloud's operations s...

OpenText SiteScope

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

OpenText SiteScope and Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) are robust monitoring solutions. Google Cloud's suite has the upper hand due to its seamless integration with other cloud services and scalability.

What features are offered by OpenText SiteScope in comparison to Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)?

OpenText SiteScope offers comprehensive monitoring of various environments, including physical and virtual systems. It monitors a wide range of servers, applications, and network devices. Google Cloud's operations suite features strong integration with other Google Cloud services, advanced logging, and real-time monitoring.

What areas of improvement can be found in OpenText SiteScope in comparison to Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)?

For OpenText SiteScope, users suggest improvements in reporting and alerting mechanisms, more intuitive and detailed reporting capabilities, and a modernized interface. For Google Cloud's operations suite, users desire enhanced support, more straightforward configuration settings, and fewer usability challenges.

How is the ease of deployment and customer service of OpenText SiteScope in comparison to Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)?

OpenText SiteScope's deployment is straightforward in diverse environments, though some users report initial setup complexities. Customer service is generally responsive but may lack comprehensive support. Google Cloud's operations suite is noted for ease of deployment within Google Cloud environments, with users appreciating the intuitive process. Customer service garners mixed reviews, with some difficulties in timely support.

What setup costs and ROI can be seen with OpenText SiteScope in comparison to Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)?

OpenText SiteScope has high initial setup costs but offers a strong ROI with comprehensive monitoring capabilities. Google Cloud's operations suite users see better upfront pricing with scalable cost benefits. ROI is perceived positively for both, with Google Cloud's suite offering better value for the cost due to its advanced features and cloud-native benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs. OpenText SiteScope Report (Updated: November 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs. OpenText SiteScope

November 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,929 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

Google Cloud's operations s...

Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

32nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Log Management (24th), Cloud Monitoring Software (19th)

OpenText SiteScope

Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

15th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is 0.9%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 1.3%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText SiteScope	1.3%
Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)	0.9%
Other	97.8%

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

Featured Reviews

Anand_Patel

Senior Technical Architect at T-Systems International GmbH

Offers reliable Ops Agent and logging transport feature with easy third-party integrations

As part of our company, we implemented several changes in our log analytics pattern, including the storage and procurement process. Earlier, before implementing the solution, our company was able to procure only one year of data, but later, we came to the three-year mark. Around 15-20% reduction has been witnessed in the total analytic consumption of our company. The aforementioned result was possible because the solution allowed the creation of a dashboard where factors like storage costs, proportion of logs, and logs presence in a storage bucket or Big Query can all be checked. Earlier all logs were stored in a raw storage, but currently our company is able to move logs in table bucket that contributes towards cost savings. It has default integration for all gcp services. recently managed Prometheus support gives more flexibility to organizations to remain connected with their current Prometheus setup. We leveraged integrated FinOps Hub for recommendations for our workloads and server configurations, helpd us lot in order to get maximum TCO.

Read full review

Hosney Osman

Technical Solution Architect at Vodafone

Proactive monitoring has reduced response time and has improved capacity planning accuracy

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 dashboard user, I do not have any negative feedback. A feature that could be added is direct integration with a ticketing tool, as it would help operation teams directly detect alarms and alerts happening in our infrastructure. Direct integration with a ticketing tool such as Remedy would be a good feature. OpenText SiteScope has some limitations, especially with integration between OpenText SiteScope and Remedy, which must be done through middle software. There are also limitations for cloud monitoring as well as for Docker and Kubernetes.

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 solution has improved our organization by reducing latency and also monitoring the costs of GCP usage by using the logging and monitoring features."

"It has really been helpful in detecting, identifying, and troubleshooting issues with cloud services used in the organization."

"It's easy to use."

"It has reduced the amount of time that we would take for troubleshooting."

"The cloud login enables us to get our logs from the different platforms that we currently use."

"The features that I have found most valuable are its graphs - if I need any statistics, in Kubernetes or Kong level or VPN level, I can quickly get the reports."

"Our company has a corporate account for Google Cloud and so our systems and clusters integrate really well."

"Google's technical support is very good."

More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) pros

"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."

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

"The biggest benefit I see from OpenText SiteScope is that it is a very professional tool, and it helps me greatly."

"The URL monitoring is excellent."

"It's a monitoring tool that's deeply integrated with Performance Center, allowing us to put a load on it and see all the information we need, and it's an inexpensive solution."

"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."

"Agentless data collection supporting a big number of monitor metrics."

"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."

More OpenText SiteScope pros

Cons

"The product provides minimal metrics that are insufficient."

"The process of logging analytics can be improved"

"Google Stackdriver is a stable product, but there is some lagging we cannot stop."

"If I want to track any round-trip or breakdowns of my response times, I'm not able to get it."

"If I want to track any round-trip or breakdowns of my response times, I'm not able to get it. My request goes through various levels of the Google Cloud Platform (GCP) and comes back to my client machine. Suppose that my request has taken 10 seconds overall, so if I want to break it down, to see where the delay is happening within my architecture, I am not able to find that out using Stackdriver."

"It could be more stable."

"It is difficult to estimate in advance how much something is going to cost."

"Operations documentation could be a bit better. It took us some time to get up and running with it."

More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) cons

"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."

"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."

"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."

"We think that AppDynamics will do this in a more satisfactory way for us and we do not have this feature with SiteScope."

"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."

"May require a dashboard for the data collected"

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

"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."

More OpenText SiteScope cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of using Stackdriver depends on usage."

"The cost could be lower."

"We have a basic standard license without any additional costs."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

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

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Construction Company

11%

Outsourcing Company

Construction Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	9

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	21

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Stackdriver?

As Ops Suite, is a google product which effectively comes at zero setup cost, in order to manage your on-premises logs on onsite, it involves negligible cost for using ops agent and it also include...

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?

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Splunk AppDynamics vs Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)

Compared 7% of the time

Datadog vs Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)

Compared 6% of the time

AWS X-Ray vs Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)

Compared 5% of the time

Amazon CloudWatch vs Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)

Compared 5% of the time

Splunk Enterprise Security vs Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver)

Compared 3% of the time

More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Competitors

Splunk AppDynamics vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 10% of the time

Dynatrace vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Real User Monitoring vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 6% of the time

VMware Aria Operations for Applications vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 6% of the time

Stackify vs OpenText SiteScope

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText SiteScope Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

October 2026

Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) report

Download Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText SiteScope

October 2026

Download OpenText SiteScope product report

Also Known As

Google Stackdriver, Stackdriver, Stackdriver Monitoring, Stackdriver Logging, Google Cloud Monitoring

Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope

Overview

Google Cloud's operations suite is a comprehensive toolset offering multi-cloud support, insights into performance, uptime, health, and scalable logging for seamless cloud operations.

This suite by Google Cloud provides robust features for organizations managing workloads on GCP and AWS. It offers real-time logging and monitoring, aiding in efficient troubleshooting and performance analysis. With automatic monitoring, statistical insights for Kubernetes and VPNs, and the ability to manage logs, it helps in optimizing technology changes and supports risk management. Despite needs for better APM, cost clarity, migration tools, and enhanced documentation, companies benefit from its capabilities in tracking errors and analyzing metrics in execution environments.

What are the key features of Google Cloud's operations suite?

Multi-cloud Integration: Seamless support for GCP and AWS environments.
Performance Visibility: Insights into system health and uptime.
Scalable Logging: Efficient log management and export capabilities.
User-friendly Interface: Intuitive interaction for easy monitoring configuration.

What benefits and ROI can be expected from Google Cloud's operations suite?

Enhanced Monitoring: Real-time updates facilitate swift response to performance issues.
Efficient Troubleshooting: Detailed log analysis helps resolve code issues quickly.
Performance Analysis: Dashboards support engineering load testing and SLA monitoring.

Industries utilizing Google Cloud's operations suite find it invaluable for optimizing cloud operations, especially in sectors involving extensive database requests and workload execution. Java and Python teams leverage its logging and alert capabilities for improved error tracking and metrics analysis, crucial for maintaining high-performance standards in tech-driven environments.

Google

OpenText SiteScope provides agentless monitoring of infrastructure and applications, offering an intuitive experience with comprehensive solutions for managing APIs, URLs, and log files. It's designed for those seeking ease of use and flexibility without the need for server agents.

SiteScope is known for its agentless architecture that facilitates seamless monitoring across a range of technologies including AWS, VMware, and APIs. Users benefit from ready-to-use templates and an intuitive dashboard. Despite its flexibility, SiteScope has challenges with integration and modern features like cloud and DevOps monitoring. The Java interface is slow and setup can be cumbersome, with costly licensing and room for improvement in reporting and scalability.

What are the key features of OpenText SiteScope?

Agentless Architecture: Eliminates the need for server agents, minimizing intrusion.
Ready-to-Use Templates: Simplifies monitoring setup across different environments.
Comprehensive Monitoring: Supports server, database, URL, and API monitoring.
Integration Capabilities: Works with AWS, VMware, and other technologies.
Intuitive Dashboard: Provides easy-to-understand data visualization.

What benefits and ROI can be expected?

Cost Efficiency: Agentless setup reduces operational costs.
Flexibility: Supports multiple technologies and environments.
Time Management: Predefined templates save setup time.
Performance Assurance: Ensures consistent performance with synthetic monitoring.
Operational Insight: Enhances decision-making through comprehensive data visualization.

OpenText SiteScope is implemented in industries like healthcare and government organizations for maintaining system performance and uptime. It supports monitoring across platforms, including Linux, Windows, and VMware, enabling users to address infrastructure and application monitoring needs without agent-related challenges.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Uber, Batterii, Q42, Dovetail Games

Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank

Buyer's Guide

Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs. OpenText SiteScope

November 2026

Free Report: Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs. OpenText SiteScope

Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) 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.