We performed a comparison between OpenText SiteScope and Splunk Enterprise Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"Simple deployment: The deployment uses protocols such as NetBios, SSH, WMI, SNMP, which means that any device with any of these protocols will be monitored."
"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."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"The product's readymade templates are perfect. It supports us a lot when we don't have much experience with the product. The templates offers us direction to proceed."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"The technical support has been very good. They are very responsive and have been helpful."
"I have also been able to take advantage of some of the more complex statistical capabilities when analyzing logs."
"I like Splunk's data aggregation and search capabilities."
"The solution allows easy gathering and ingestion of the data."
"It has a big user base, so the community is useful."
"The ability to ingest different log types from many different products in our environment is most valuable."
"The UI of Splunk makes it easier for our analysts to move around and see what they need to see."
"The connections to the database are very good and updating the data files is simple to do. The dashboards are useful and user-friendly."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"They have not kept up with browser security requirements or advances in GUIs, they switched to a corruptible database architecture instead of text config 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."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"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."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"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."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"Splunk can improve regex/asset analysis as we do not want to crawl until it is done."
"We were inundated with the amount of alerts and alarms that we could get out of it. It is also a resource hog and we didn't have the resources to support it on-prem so we're taking it offline now."
"I would like to see an updated dashboard. The dashboard is a little out-of-date. It could be made prettier."
"The algorithms customization of Splunk could improve. They have limited algorithms for machine learning support. If they can allow the user to add more machine learning algorithms, such as the ability to choose the algorithm that a user might want. Additionally, they should provide the required libraries for those algorithms, and then analyzes the data for use."
"I have concerns about the architecture as well since I can see it is not very well defined."
"The monitoring aspect of Splunk could be improved. We have to do some queries to get as much information as CrowdStrike or other solutions provide. If you run a big query, you will see a delay. That is the only concern we have because it will take some time if you query large data sets."
"This is a costly solution."
"I feel the solution to be too slow."
OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 1st in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 228 reviews. OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText SiteScope writes "Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Splunk Enterprise Security writes "It has a drag-and-drop interface, so you don't need to know SQL or Java to construct a query ". OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and New Relic, whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security and Microsoft Sentinel. See our OpenText SiteScope vs. Splunk Enterprise Security report.
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.
