No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

InfoVista 5View NetFlow vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

InfoVista 5View NetFlow
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
86th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
15th
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 November 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of InfoVista 5View NetFlow is 0.4%, up from 0.3% 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
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText SiteScope1.3%
InfoVista 5View NetFlow0.4%
Other98.3%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

YE
OSS Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Great for service discovery and load balancing and enables us to monitor the traffic flow
We use InfoVista 5View NetFlow on a private cloud. This product has improved the way our organization functions through the better discovery of services. We check the IP address for Office 365 and other cloud applications used in business operations. We use InfoVista 5View NetFlow to understand the cost of the problems on our network links. We monitor the traffic flow and check which application is causing a lot of traffic. Instead of buying more bandwidth, we target the pocket with very high traffic. We move these applications so that the traffic is served through another partner. From Milan to Rome, we use various utilities for network load balancing for applications requiring excessive traffic. We monitor the traffic with InfoVista 5View NetFlow before going to the business and checking the on-site location for problems or issues.
Hosney Osman - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"InfoVista 5View NetFlow allows us to control the application layer and manage API connections, i.e. Facebook logins or whatever other third-party API services we require."
"InfoVista 5View NetFlow is very powerful; it can go into the network to discover very low-level trouble in two or three seconds and, in a low range of time, certify network processes where you can see the data."
"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."
"I would recommend the product."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"SiteScope is deployed on our network perimeter, and gives our operations teams an end user perspective of service availability."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"My advice to other people considering SiteScope as a solution in this category of tools is that I think SiteScope is a good product."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
 

Cons

"A little bit better documentation on the details is needed because this subject is not easy sometimes to understand, which limits the capability of the software."
"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."
"May require a dashboard for the data collected"
"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."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities. Currently there's one for Amazon."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"I think that the scalability needs to be worked on a bit. We can scale fine horizontally, but we’d like to scale less horizontal and be more compact."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

5View NetFlow
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Warren Consolidated Schools
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Dynatrace, Datadog and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. Updated: October 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.