ConnectWise Automate, formerly LabTech, is a remote monitoring and management (RMM) platform. It provides powerful automation to discover and manage devices, monitor for problems, and scripts repetitive action.
$700
ConnectWise PSA
Score 8.4 out of 10
Small Businesses (1-50 employees)
ConnectWise PSA (formerly Manage) is a business management platform for companies that sell, service, and support technology. The platform is cloud-based and integrates automation, help desk and customer service, sales, marketing, project management, and business analytics. It is the hub of the ConnectWise suite.
$35
Per Tech Per Month
Pricing
ConnectWise Automate
ConnectWise PSA
Editions & Modules
Agents
$1.00-$6.00
per month/per agent
Implementation Fee
$700
Subscription
$35.00
Per Tech Per Month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ConnectWise Automate
ConnectWise PSA
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ConnectWise Automate
ConnectWise PSA
Considered Both Products
ConnectWise Automate
Verified User
Engineer
Chose ConnectWise Automate
We selected ConnectWise Automate over Kaseya as it provided many of the same features but less of the headache. Often times, scripts would not work in Kaseya or updates would not push. We have not had this experience with Automate, scripts and such just run when scheduled. …
Enable has a clunky interface more suited for management reporting versus technician toolbox and Ninja is very basic and lacks any significant bells and whistles behind basic remote command interface. Very poor in features to the point if being quite disappointing during a …
I have evaluated NinjaRMM, but it was after I was already familiar with ConnectWise Automate. While it seems like a good product, I found that ConnectWise Automate was more flexible in allowing me to make custom configurations to meet various business needs across different …
I believe the monitoring and alerts in Continuum command is better, but [ConnectWise Automate (formerly LabTech)] does have stronger scripting, and perhaps a better interface. N-Central is inferior on all fronts to both. I did not make the purchasing decision. I would myself …
It just seems like Automate is a tool for professionals who want to be the best proactive solution for their customers. There are so many different things built into Connectwise Automate which makes it a superior tool compared to anything else on the market currently. Once …
I touched on this in the previous section some. Kaseya's choice of managed antivirus was very poor (KAV, a tweaked version of Kaspersky) when it first started. It took them a long time to fix anything, and the fixes usually produced new and different issues. Kaseya kept …
Automate is the most well-established platform among its peers. Because it is part of a native ecosystem, you know that everything from remote management to ticketing to quoting an invoicing will work together. I have used other platforms, and many of them share core …
We switched from Kaseya to Automate 7-8 years ago - it was no contest at the time and Kaseya wasn't cutting it in a number of areas at that time that was really hurting us. I'm sure it's improved since then.
Automate is the most flexible and customizable tool on the market - but it's also the most complex and requires the most care and feeding to run smoothly...
The Continuum RMM is very simplistic in comparison to Automate. The scripting engine in Continuum doesn't compare at all with the scripting in Automate. Continuum has a single level of agent grouping (all agents for a client are in a single group). For clients that have …
Automate is superior to N-Able in every way. Once SolarWinds purchased/obtained N-Able the product grew stagnant, which is why we moved away from that platform. Even now (several years later) I feel that there is no comparison of Automate to N-Able as Automate is much farther …
When we looked at Kaseya it required even more setup than Labtech at the time and we did not feel we had the resources to implement it. We still feel we made the right decision selecting Labtech over Kaseya. At the time we were using Zenith InfoTech which is now named something …
From what I know - LabTech appears to be the most robust platform on the market and the most technical one as well. We have not tried any others up to this point. We selected LabTech because of the integration it has with ConnectWise and other existing products that we use.
Because the monitoring was so weak in Kaseya, we were using Kaseya NOC services so that they would keep all the monitors up to date. That was a spectacular failure and they still missed things left, right and centre. We switched to Labtech and saved the costs of a third party …
We selected LabTech because we already had a very good ongoing customer support experience with ConnectWise. We had LabTech before ConnectWise acquired it, and had Kaseya, but gave LabTech another try and we are very glad that we did. We did not have a good experience with …
Labtech is better by far. We chose Labtech because it has a more friendly user interface and it seemed to have better back end support. Since switching from Continuum, there is no looking back. We also demoed GFI and at the time it seemed like a very basic software in …
We started with Kaseya years ago and paid a hefty price for it in dollars. It was an adequate product at the time but when LabTech came along, it was priced much better and had much more capability than Kaseya did at the time.
Prior to using LabTech, we used Kaseya. While Kaseya and LabTech have much of the same functionality, LabTech does things better and more consistently. Also, we rely on ConnectWise as our ticketing system and PSA. LabTech has two way ticket synchronization with ConnectWise that …
We used to use Kaseya VSA and liked it a lot. The primary reason we switched was the oppressive licensing costs. They've since changed their licensing but it was too late for us as we'd already made the switch. LabTech compares well with Kaseya VSA and neither are bad products …
ConnectWise PSA compares pretty closely with autotask based on my usage as a technician. I cannot address it beyond ticketing. Zendesk was a much simpler ticketing system and did not have much of the more complicated functions. Zendesk did at the time integrate very well with …
ConnectWise Manage is a very robust tool with multiple uses. If you have the money to spend, it is a very good product. The ability to centrally manage all of your tickets, users, computer information, as well as it's reporting functionality makes this product stand out above …
We used to use Commit. While it was good. Connectwise manage is better as far as keeping track of things and being able to automate a lot of things so that we dont have to remember to do it. Takes the human error out of a lot of issues. We also went with it because we were …
ConnectWise Manage is better than all of them. It's more complete and has a consistent interface across all of its modules. Very easy to filter and find data with Views. I like that it has its own program too, not just a website. I think the program is essentially like a mini …
Autotask and ConnectWise Manage are the two heavy-hitters in the PSA space. Autotask has a much more updated UI and is much more user-friendly than ConnectWise Manage. ConnectWise Manage is more popular than Autotask in the channel and often products are integrated with …
We have used Plat and it was not a very stable system. It did not have cloudbased so we had to host everything in house. Having this on the cloud is so much better!
I was honestly coerced into it by my peer group at the time... but it was the right decision. We transformed from a break/fix to a Managed Services business and probably couldn't have made that transition without ConnectWise or some other tool like it. It allowed us access to …
We moved away from N-Able several years ago because the product development seemed non-existent. When SolarWinds purchased the company/software is sat for multiple years with no advancements, therefore we moved to ConnectWise. We don't regret for one minute moving away from …
I have not personally used any other PSA's but have demoed and spoken with people that have used other products. ConnectWise made sense for us because of the integration into our RMM and Remote tools. They continue to build and grow the platform. As far as I'm concerned at this …
We chose ConnectWise because it has a reputation of good support. I am glad that we have chosen ConnectWise as our platform for support, because that has definitely been our experience. When questions or issues have arisen, ConnectWise support was able to help us get things …
We only evaluated Kaseya and Tiger Paw. ConnectWise was easier to use and looked to be more robust. Integration with LabTech waan a easy fit as it is also a ConnectWise product.
I have 5 yrs experience with Autotask, which is a comparable platform. Where Autotask fell flat was its lack of integrations with other products. Connectwise has been smart with its acquisitions of Quosal, Labtech and ScreenConnect, and is now tying them together in some …
We've evaluated several options in the past, but none offered all the features, integration, and control that ConnectWise does. Autotask is the classic competitor that never quite stacked up, while Kaseya BMS is the newer rival that is also short on some features, as well as …
We moved from AutoTask to Connectwise ~3 years ago. I understand that AutoTask has made some great improvements since then, but Connectwise has served us well especially with integration with LabTech and Quosal.
We selected ConnectWise five years ago because many companies like us were using it, it was recommended to us be many, we were using Microsoft CRM at the time at felt this might be better suited for our business.
Features
ConnectWise Automate
ConnectWise PSA
Application Performance Management
Comparison of Application Performance Management features of Product A and Product B
ConnectWise Automate
8.5
1 Ratings
19% above category average
ConnectWise PSA
-
Ratings
Virtualization monitoring
8.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
IT Asset Discovery
9.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Monitoring Tasks
Comparison of Monitoring Tasks features of Product A and Product B
ConnectWise Automate
7.4
22 Ratings
1% above category average
ConnectWise PSA
-
Ratings
Remote monitoring
10.022 Ratings
00 Ratings
Network device monitoring
8.021 Ratings
00 Ratings
Activity Monitoring
8.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Management Tasks
Comparison of Management Tasks features of Product A and Product B
ConnectWise Automate
7.8
22 Ratings
10% above category average
ConnectWise PSA
-
Ratings
Patch Management
10.021 Ratings
00 Ratings
Policy-based automation
9.022 Ratings
00 Ratings
Remote Access
Comparison of Remote Access features of Product A and Product B
ConnectWise Automate
8.0
1 Ratings
19% above category average
ConnectWise PSA
-
Ratings
Attended device access
10.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Unattended device access
8.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Mobile device access
5.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Virtual device access
8.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Multiple-display support
9.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Multiple concurrent sessions
8.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Incident and problem management
Comparison of Incident and problem management features of Product A and Product B
ConnectWise Automate
-
Ratings
ConnectWise PSA
8.7
88 Ratings
6% above category average
Organize and prioritize service tickets
00 Ratings
9.388 Ratings
Expert directory
00 Ratings
6.950 Ratings
Subscription-based notifications
00 Ratings
8.361 Ratings
ITSM collaboration and documentation
00 Ratings
8.268 Ratings
Ticket creation and submission
00 Ratings
9.888 Ratings
Ticket response
00 Ratings
9.787 Ratings
Self Help Community
Comparison of Self Help Community features of Product A and Product B
ConnectWise Automate
-
Ratings
ConnectWise PSA
8.0
82 Ratings
0% below category average
External knowledge base
00 Ratings
8.367 Ratings
Internal knowledge base
00 Ratings
7.777 Ratings
Multi-Channel Help
Comparison of Multi-Channel Help features of Product A and Product B
I recommend it to all IT colleagues; regardless of the size of the PCs with which you work most of the time, the application allows connection stability between computers that make it possible to continue working or taking care of the infrastructure from afar.
BrightGauge lets us know when we have critical issues that need solving. A massive influx of tickets all at the same time triggers an investigation. Usually, it is tied to a server going down, which we can address. It would not be helpful for a small MSP or IT department with just a few daily tickets. The stats are better used to track a large amount of clients.
Tickets- Customers can email and a ticket is generated and falls under their profile for historical records. You can save documents and select if they are customer facing or only internal facing. The option as well to have communication in tickets whether its internal facing or customer facing is nice to have when you're trying to keep a record or important details for just internal means and the customer doesn't have to see all the jargon.
Procurement - It's great to have this integrate with Quosal Sell. Quotes being processed into opportunities and then into a sales order which connects to a ticket or project is pretty easy to use. It does have a learning curve but once you get the hang of it, it's straightforward. Everything is pretty connected, whether keeping track of products customers have purchased historically through us, to knowing what ticket is associated to an RMA.
They have conflicting scheduling paradigms. When scheduling patching for clients, the 1st Friday is interpreted as the very first Friday of the month, even if this is the 1st of the month. For scripting, the 1st Friday of the month is interpreted as the 1st Friday of the 1st FULL WEEK of the month. This makes no sense to have two different interpretations, and makes it unreliable to schedule recurring scripts to fall when recurring maintenance does. The scripts need to be done manually because of this.
There is no way to dictate reboot orders for patch policies. This tied directly in with my first point. We have some clients that require reboot orders. This is not possible without having different patch policies for each server and specifying a time this way. But, there aren't small enough increments of time to make this reliable, plus patching duration might vary. Excluding reboots with patching and scheduling reboot scripts fixes this. However, this can't be done once on a recurring schedule due to the different scheduling paradigms already discussed. We have to schedule these manually each month.
Annual or more than annualized data is desperately needed for MSPs to show trends, current limitation is previous 240 days for ConnectWise tickets
Alerts when datasets do not sync properly, I have to rely on my team to notice vs get an automated alert from BrightGauge
Small thing, but it would be nice to have more options on the report scheduler to enable a start date. If you wish to do it quarterly, you have to start the schedule exactly 3 months from the next run.
The primary reason for this rating is that ConnectWise Automate is currently so integral to our operations that moving away would involve more man hours than we would realistically have to invest. However, ConnectWise Automate is also completely capable of meeting all of our business needs and customizable to the point where if something is not meeting those needs out of the box, it can be modified to do what we want. From only installing software on machines if a different software package exists, to push a new version of that software is available, to check if credentials for user/machine have been updated to our new standards and then updating them if they have not, ConnectWise Automate is capable of doing everything we ask of it.
ConnectWise has uniquely positioned themselves with the Modern Office Suite to have direct integration with a nearly full suite of tools for MSPs. Although each tool may not necessarily be the absolute best tool on the market, the efficiencies leveraged through direct integration make the entire suite an obvious choice for most companies.
Basic use of the product is fairly easy. Information about the machines you manage can be found in customizable dashboards, which can be unique for each user, and, therefore, properly suited to the users' needs/job function. This is not a 10 because some of the interfaces are very clunky (Patch Management), and some features are not intuitive and not well documented (reporting). Scripting and Patch Management have a fairly steep learning curve (For structure in patch management and syntax in scripting), but once learned, they work well.
I have been using ConnectWise since 2004 and I am impressed with the progress they have made. However, there are still bugs that don't work quite like they should. If I were to run reports and get consistent answers along with a couple other annoyances, then I would score CW as a 10
We use the cloud version of ConnectWise and in the last 5 years it has never been down for us during business hours. I can only recall 1 time when it was not available during off hours when we wanted to use it.
It used to be great, but then they broke reporting, speed and responsiveness with version 11 and the new Patch Manager. It's really bad and their support people are way behind on fixing so many bugs. They have really gone downhill. If they don't get it together soon, we'll start looking around.
Some tab for certain areas load speeds could be better. Dashboards can load slowly when they reference multiple reports. Some reports can load slowly based on the tables and views they are accessing. At times the SQL queries being performed in the background can actually timeout and a tab or screen will fail to load.
ConnectWise Automate lets you manage more endpoints, with enhanced productivity and improved service, all without increasing expenses. It can manage patches and updates across thousands of computers. We also use it for customized monitoring and alerting on workstations and servers. Monitoring is really robust and granular. It does a great job of gathering a TON of data about the network, and that data is searchable. There are a bunch of different reports built in. Integrates with Manage, Control, and other applications. It does a ton of stuff out of the box, and has endless customization options.
The front line support techs are wildly inconsistent when it comes to the level of support. Sometimes you get someone who just wants to throw links to University documentation at you, sometimes you get someone who truly tries to understand your issue and confers with peers and managers to find an answer, and sometimes you get someone who just wants to create a ticket and escalate immediately. If you ask three different techs the same question you will probably get three different answers, one of them being, "That's not possible."
The Online training has been re-done and needs a lot more work. When you look at training in different roles, it shows a lot of the same topics but no explanation to what is different about them. Several times that topics are the exact same, but they make you re-take the same information for a different topic, instead of marking that you have already completed that portion of training.
We are a telecoms company. Whilst CW were very happy to sell us their product and tell us how good it is for telecoms. All the training material is geared towards IT MSP's. The on-line training material was virtually useless. We found the implementation a bit of a joke. They tried telling us 12 hours of implementation time would be sufficient to launch the product. We erred on the side of caution and paid for 24 hours. This was quickly eaten away and we were nowhere near ready to go-live. I find the on-line chat facility is of much more use for us.
Start small and learn the in's and out's before making policies and rolling things out company wide. Ask the questions of why if you don't agree with something or your company does things a different way. Usually they are done a certain way for a reason. Start simple with roll out and slowly enable or add on the functionality that is needed.
Rather than letting them sell you a block of time for implementation, create a list of things that must be completed do declare the implementation complete. The implementer will have the discretion on what they set up and in what order. They will be trying to end their services in as little time as possible and may not get things set up right. You are best advised to hire a third-party wizard that has done many of these setups. Record the audio and video of all of your implementation sessions.
I believe the monitoring and alerts in Continuum command is better, but [ConnectWise Automate (formerly LabTech)] does have stronger scripting, and perhaps a better interface. N-Central is inferior on all fronts to both. I did not make the purchasing decision. I would myself likely pick Continuum if I had to make a on the spot choice.
Everyone but dynamics had holes in it. Dynamics is good, but it requires more development time. I spoke with some people that have CW and liked it. But when I inquired after our frustrations, I discovered they had a full time scheduling & logistics CW manager and the field people were using it purely like any other more simplistic ticket system. They said it would be impossible otherwise. The one big difference is the transparency of the sales effort. The other sales people were honest on the limitations or potential challenges and worked with us. They also worked with our agenda. At CW they don't have that option. The consulting time is eaten through a pre-formatted agenda which they communicate too you, not with you.
ConnectWise seems to have a good understanding of the IT service industry. During the required onboarding training, they even preach configuring only features that you need right now, as you can always scale up later. The feature set for the most part takes into considerations all aspects of an IT business, whether small or enterprise, or growing from one to the next.
We found we were able to provide good monitoring of our customers sites which was an objective. However, that came at a significant time investment that never seemed to be finished.
We were able to negotiate a price that worked for us for an up-front purchase which was nice.
We found the pricing to be very competitive.
Bottom line for us was despite the pros of the product, we found other RMM solutions to be a better overall "value" due to not having to dedicate technicians to maintaining the product.