IT Service Management · head-to-head
HaloITSM vs Xurrent ITSM
As of 2 Nov 2026, the panel rates HaloITSM 2.5/5 and Xurrent ITSM 3/5 in IT Service Management. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 0 of the 6 judges pick HaloITSM and 6 pick Xurrent ITSM. Xurrent ITSM scores higher on 6 of 6 criteria (Self-service portal & service catalog, Assets, CMDB & discovery, Change, problem & release management, plus 3 more). Provenance — HaloITSM: UK / wider Europe; Xurrent ITSM: Rest of world. Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made.
The short answer
The benches split. Xurrent ITSM holds the higher mean in five criteria: service desk (7.0 to 6.2), change and problem (4.8 to 2.7), assets and CMDB (6.2 to 4.0), self-service portal (6.3 to 3.8) and deployment and integration (6.8 to 5.0) — six judges lean Xurrent on change and problem, assets and CMDB and self-service portal, five on deployment and integration. HaloITSM's one mean lead is pricing transparency, 4.7 to 2.2 with five judges leaning HaloITSM; pricing was not weighted against Xurrent. The genuine splits: service desk leans 2 HaloITSM, 1 Xurrent, 3 ties; on sovereignty Xurrent's mean is 5.8 to 5.3 yet three judges lean HaloITSM to one. Weighted totals run 5.8 to 6.3 for Xurrent against 0 to 5.9 for HaloITSM, the 0 from the change and configuration manager judge, who found no public information on change types, approvals, a change calendar or an exportable audit trail.
Choose HaloITSM if
- You need a published price figure before talking to sales — HaloITSM's pages publish "£69 per agent, per month (billed annually)", while we found no price figure on Xurrent's pricing page; five judges lean HaloITSM on pricing transparency. Onboarding packages are required at a bespoke cost, so the full annual cost is not computable from public pages alone.
- Your team handles service desk intake across email, chat, phone and social in one queue and wants optional AI triage, summarisation and knowledge discovery documented as routed to OpenAI and disablable — the service desk lean there is 2 HaloITSM to 1 Xurrent with three ties.
- You need to weigh a non-US contracting entity and US subprocessors — Xurrent's pages name Xurrent, Inc. of Austin, Texas as the contracting entity and list Google (email hosting) and Slack in the United States as subprocessors; three judges lean HaloITSM on sovereignty to one for Xurrent.
- You want a UK vendor on paper — the HaloITSM verdict names Halo Service Solutions Limited as a UK vendor; note that every HaloITSM sovereignty attribute reads "unknown".
Choose Xurrent ITSM if
- You need change management with an RFC-to-workflow change model, risk assessment and an audit trail — six judges lean Xurrent on change and problem, and HaloITSM's change and configuration manager judge found no public information on change types, approvals, a change calendar or an exportable audit trail.
- Your team builds on public APIs — Xurrent's pages document REST, GraphQL, bulk, events, mail and webhook APIs with a change log and deprecation notices; five judges lean Xurrent on deployment and integration, means 6.8 to 5.0.
- You need a self-service portal for end users — six judges lean Xurrent there, means 6.3 to 3.8.
- You need asset and CMDB coverage — six judges lean Xurrent, means 6.2 to 4.0.
- You are a managed-service provider — the Xurrent verdict documents MSP licence plans, account trusts and billing into external invoicing tools, and says its persona-weighted totals peak for managed-service providers.
Read this comparison as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The bench's picks
Same scores, different priorities: each judge's weighting applied to both products. The split is the finding.
- The Service Desk Lead HaloITSM Xurrent ITSM picks Xurrent ITSM
- The MSP Owner HaloITSM Xurrent ITSM picks Xurrent ITSM
- The Change & Configuration Manager HaloITSM Xurrent ITSM picks Xurrent ITSM
- The Municipal IT Lead HaloITSM Xurrent ITSM picks Xurrent ITSM
- The Solo IT Admin HaloITSM Xurrent ITSM picks Xurrent ITSM
- The Skeptic HaloITSM Xurrent ITSM picks Xurrent ITSM
Criterion by criterion
| Criterion | HaloITSM | Xurrent ITSM |
|---|---|---|
| Service desk, incidents & requests | 3 of 5 | 3.5 of 5 |
| Change, problem & release management | 1.5 of 5 | 2.5 of 5 |
| Assets, CMDB & discovery | 2 of 5 | 3 of 5 |
| Self-service portal & service catalog | 2 of 5 | 3 of 5 |
| Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation | 2.5 of 5 | 3.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 2.5 of 5 | 3 of 5 |
| Criterion | HaloITSM | Xurrent ITSM | The bench leans |
|---|---|---|---|
| Service desk, incidents & requests | HaloITSM, 2 of 6 judges | ||
| Change, problem & release management | Xurrent ITSM, 6 of 6 judges | ||
| Assets, CMDB & discovery | Xurrent ITSM, 6 of 6 judges | ||
| Self-service portal & service catalog | Xurrent ITSM, 6 of 6 judges | ||
| Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation | Xurrent ITSM, 5 of 6 judges | ||
| European sovereignty | HaloITSM, 3 of 6 judges | ||
| Pricing transparency | no published price | not comparable |
Stars show the bench average per criterion; the lean counts which product each judge scored higher. Open a judge's tab for their reasoning on both sides.
Sovereignty, side by side
| Dimension | HaloITSM | Xurrent ITSM |
|---|---|---|
| Legal entity | Not determined | Not determined |
| Hosting location | Not determined | Not determined |
| Hosting options | Not determined | Not determined |
| Open source | Not determined | Not determined |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined | Not determined |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | Not determined |
Facts, side by side
Only facts both products carry under the same definition — anything else would not be a fair row.
| Compliance · Certifications | yes · yes · yes1 | SOC 2 Type II · ISO 27001 · ISO 27018 · C52 |
|---|---|---|
| Compliance · Subprocessor list | yes3 | yes4 |
| Product · Incident management | ITIL framework, prioritised incidents, tracked SLAs1 | incident management5 |
| Product · Project management | Gantt Timelines, Tasks & Milestones, Resourcing, Time Tracking, Project Templates, Budgets & Costs6 | project management integrated with ITSM5 |
| Subprocessors · Aws | Amazon Web Services · hosting · US · UK · Canada · South Africa · Australia · Bahrain · Germany3 | Amazon Web Services, Inc. · Cloud Hosting and AI Inference (Bedrock) · EEA (Ireland and Germany) · United States · United Kingdom · Switzerland · Australia7 |
Questions about HaloITSM and Xurrent ITSM
Which is better, HaloITSM or Xurrent ITSM?
As of 2 Nov 2026, the panel rates Xurrent ITSM higher: 3/5 against 2.5/5. Weighted by what each judge cares about, 0 of the 6 judges pick HaloITSM and 6 pick Xurrent ITSM. Which one fits depends on the criteria that matter to you; the table on this page shows both side by side, and each judge’s reading has its own page. Both were scored by the same AI bench under the same rubric, from public evidence only, as the methodology describes.
Is HaloITSM or Xurrent ITSM European?
HaloITSM is European (UK / wider Europe). Xurrent ITSM is not European by provenance (Rest of world). Provenance is read from each company’s own legal pages: who builds it and who owns it.