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

ManageEngine IT360 vs SCOM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 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

ManageEngine IT360
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
85th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
IT Asset Management (25th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (70th)
SCOM
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of ManageEngine IT360 is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SCOM is 1.5%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SCOM1.5%
ManageEngine IT3600.5%
Other98.0%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

ZM
It manager at PTC (Public Telecomuncation Corporation)
Good monitoring and alerting capability, and it is easy to deploy
This solution is good for configuration management. The monitoring capability is easy to use and it can be done without any training. ManageEngine is easy to deploy. It is easy to identify and collect information from all of the nodes on the network. The alerting capability is good and it will send out emails.
AK
Assistant Manager at SMS group GmbH
Have integrated effective monitoring and seamless alerting with improved visualization capabilities
The most valuable feature of SCOM is its monitoring capability, and we have integrated SCOM with Grafana, which is a dashboarding tool. We have implemented and integrated this to create dashboarding of the SCOM monitoring system for the database, SQL, and the Linux servers we have configured in SCOM. We have created separate dashboarding for it, and the monitoring and creating rules and monitors in the management servers and management packs that SCOM provides are very useful for us. The alerting mechanism of SCOM has benefited our operations because we have modified the thresholds as per our internal requirements. We have configured threshold modifications for the CPU, memory, and especially for disk space. For routine disk space usage on the system, we have provided a separate threshold configuration.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is easy to identify and collect information from all of the nodes on the network."
"The technical support is good."
"I would suggest you use this product as it's easy for administration, and is based on distributed model support."
"All I know is that when it comes to managing the active directory, ManageEngine is something I consider to be the best."
"The product helps users stay on top of gaining insight into the active directory, permissions and security sets, and user group policy changes."
"The monitoring capability is easy to use and it can be done without any training."
"The primary use case of this solution is to manage and to protect the web servers, the mail server, and the website in my company."
"Customer Service: Absolutely fantastic."
"If I have to choose any one product for server monitoring to take care of all aspects of monitoring out of the box, SCOM is number one."
"SCOM provides alerting capabilities and threshold settings, which are helpful for monitoring."
"Setting up SCOM is straightforward and takes about an hour as long as you have all your firewalls and DNS settings in place."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"SCOM is a great monitoring tool."
"This solution helps our application teams by allowing them to drill further into issues and perform a root cause analysis."
"The tool helps to monitor Windows servers. It offers alerts from a central location."
"We like the deployment of the machines and the features that they have, and it's easy to use."
 

Cons

"The ManageEngine features could improve to show graphs of the traffic and network utility."
"ManageEngine needs to fix the downtime scheduler for SNMP monitored devices. Alarms are still generated for the devices placed into scheduled maintenance."
"The GUI could be improved."
"We would like to have support for integration with ServiceDesk."
"This is because of the lack of available technical knowledge in terms of competence and maximizing the power of the product."
"The product could use more intelligence, automation and general availability of product information."
"Almost always, these alert storms can put IT managers and operators off the product and give the impression that everything is broken or not working properly, so making them easier to work with will help SCOM administrators (especially if they are new to SCOM) manage and understand what the product is showing them."
"In terms of features that could be improved, I would say the agent integration into the operating system. We are having difficulties integrating Linux into some of the networking devices."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
"SCOM needs to improve its usability."
"On-prem network monitoring is something that could be improved drastically."
"Very high administrative burden, requires constant maintenance."
"GUI performance is the one aspect where I can see that improvement on it will make customers happy."
"SCOM is not a flexible product. The initial setup should be easier to complete."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Our Enterprise Agreement includes the price."
"There is a license needed to use this solution and it is paid annually."
"The platform is cost-effective due to our existing Microsoft support."
"We have to pay for a license and the price is fine for us."
"The pricing is good, and it's part of their system center suite."
"It is the cheapest product available in the market."
"SCOM is very cheap because it's included in the license for the System Center suite, which is around $8,400 per CAL."
"SCOM is part of the System Center suite and I am satisfied with the pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
31%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise22
Large Enterprise54
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SCOM?
I am not aware of the exact pricing as it is managed by my supervisor. As an academic institution, we receive substantial discounts.
What needs improvement with SCOM?
We believe that the dashboarding in SCOM needs to be improved or enhanced because it is not too expressive in reporting. We can work on deploying new ways of viewing things and modifying visualizat...
What is your primary use case for SCOM?
My usual use case for SCOM is as an administrator role where I create reports and provide system configuration for Linux and installation of the SCOM agent. I handle deploying and upgrading the age...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

IT360
System Center Operations Manager, SCOM 2012
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Khimji Ramdas, RME Global, Bank of Namibia, DORMA, PMSI, National Commodities Exchange, EMA, Redstone, First Source
Dialog Telekom
Find out what your peers are saying about ManageEngine IT360 vs. SCOM and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.