It's billed per user license.

The way we approached it was to look at who actually needed to be on-call and licensed people accordingly. The pricing is tiered so we took that into account. If we were to license 10 or 20 people, that would be a certain price. And if we were to license 50 or 100, there would be a little bit of discounting. But the per-user license was right in line with what we were expecting.

The cost depends very much on the company's size and usage. We're a very high use case compared to many companies, so we had to consider licensing costs carefully. If we added all our users, that would be 30,000, and that's no good; we wouldn't have been able to afford it. For example, we had to put in customization to sync across on-call users. For the license per user, the price is very reasonable and comparable to ServiceNow when factoring in everything that needs to get up and running.

Considering the breadth of features provided by xMatters, it's worth the cost. It gives us everything we need, and there are still additional functionalities we're not currently using that we're licensed to use.  

I know roughly what we pay per year. For what we use it for and what its purpose is, it is very valuable.

I am not really privy to how much my client is paying for this service. They just tell me the number of licenses that they have. Every time that I say, "I need extra licenses to make sure that all Level 1 and 2s have their own xMatters account," they keep telling me that it is too expensive. If the only purpose is to call people, it doesn't justify the cost of paying more than the number of licenses that they already have. 

This limits my ability to implement other things that I had hoped could have been implemented, like the notifications. For example, I could have used notifications to inform people that there is a P1 or P2 assigned to them. However, because of the limitations and licenses, we could not. 

We had a second instance of xMatters on our business continuity team at the company. They recently went in a different direction because their contract was up and the renewal costs went up significantly compared to where they used to be. So, there is a level of concern about the acquisition regarding Everbridge's potential desire to increase prices and take advantage of this very good product.

There's a significant difference between a full license, which allows people to respond to messages or acknowledge a message, versus a more scaled-down license, which only allows people to see the notification. The full license is significantly more expensive, so we need to evaluate whether new users need it when onboarding them into the system. It does require some active license management to make sure that people have the correct licenses, and we're not handing out full licenses to somebody who will never need to respond to messages or participate in an active workflow where they have a step they need to complete.

You should perhaps arrange an evaluation or trial to just test it out. Get your feet wet. That is so important. If you don't try it, then you won't know. 

We're currently per license. We're paying around $44,000 per year for 80 full users and 300 standard users. For a new implementation, we also need to pay for an expert.

The pricing and licensing are okay. I wish that the user licenses were cheaper but the stakeholder licenses are at a reasonable cost.

I think it is excellent value for money. I can't remember what we're paying now, but the per agent cost is extremely reasonable for what the platform does. It's entirely agnostic of where you are getting your alarms from. You could even trigger an alarm by email if you want. It's that open to what triggers an event. 

Every customer would like a free ride, of course, and being a customer, I definitely feel the pricing is too high.

A caveat here is that initially we procured 150 licenses and we have almost 1,500 users in IT. We had to come up with a few ideas for determining which users get a license and which users don't need one. Due to the limitation of the number of licenses, we were unable to integrate the user profiles with Active Directory. 

Also, having that many licenses versus that many employees won't help us. It would be good if there was a feature where we could trigger all the users we need in a single go. That would really help in a crisis situation.

I don't make the decisions on the cost aspect. We haven't had any complaints. I think it has a reasonable price. 

This is a subscription-based, SaaS solution. There were some additional costs during the implementation because it was well beyond their standard configuration.

I would definitely say it's worth the value. I wouldn't say it's expensive, but most people who pick xMatters are not going to select xMatters based on price. There are other lower-priced competitors that are out there. But I would say for what we're getting, it's worth the money.

I can't really comment on the value in terms of comparison. It could be the most expensive product in the world. It could also be the cheapest, or it could be safely in the middle. 

It feels like good value in the sense that the service is excellent. The people above me who look at such things have renewed it a couple of times, and I think they would have thought whether it was good value, whether it was wildly overpriced, or whether there were better and cheaper alternatives. So, from that perspective, the pricing is fair and proper.

It seemed comparable or more reasonable than some of the other solutions, at least when we evaluated it. There are no extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

Its cost is good, given the breadth of features provided by xMatters.

Licensing varies widely, depending on usage. It can be cheap or quite expensive, depending on volume and features.

I'm not really involved with the cost standpoint. I've only heard rumors of how much it costs. It seems to be on the higher end from a cost standpoint.

We would advise new users to reach out to the XM sales teams for a better quote.

xMatters is pricey, but you have to consider what a critical incident costs your organization. xMatters shortens the time to resolution, so the amount saved in potential lost revenue and productivity has justified it for our organization.

This is our biggest issue: licensing. Our customer has only purchased a set number of full licensed users, and we are constantly running up against our license limit. To mitigate licensing concerns, we completely control at the admin level user additions and removals, and do a monthly cleanup process driven by security contractor removal reports. 

If the licensing were cheaper, our customer might buy more. However, I can’t imagine getting away from license management, unless the licenses suddenly became cheaper.

I do not get involved with pricing, since I am on the technical side of the tool.

It is worth the cost.

You need to know the number of users that are going to use it, which is usually pretty easy to calculate. It's on a per-user license.

I do not think it is worth the value. I think it costs too much. It does not do anything significant over what some out-of-the-box functionality of the ITSM tool can do.

I would advise people to really look at their use cases to make sure that the scheduling portion of it meets their current business requirements as far as rotation goes. This tool works great if the team rotates on a perfect rotation. If it is a small team, it will rotate weekly or rotate daily. If you have any complex leave through it at all, it will not work very effectively. Then, you have to apply bushwhack-type solutions to it.

Then, in pricing, you are limited on your number of SMS messages that you can send a month and the licensing cost annually.

Pricing is pretty straightforward and listed on their website. I recommend starting small and expanding later.