IT Service Management
HaloITSM
UK / wider Europe Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Halo Service Solutions Limited · www.usehalo.com
Compare with Xurrent ITSM → Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
HaloITSM at a glance
- Vendor
- Halo Service Solutions Limited
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates HaloITSM 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. HaloITSM is a cloud ITSM platform from Halo Service Solutions Limited, a UK vendor. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 2 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
HaloITSM is a cloud ITSM platform from Halo Service Solutions Limited, a UK vendor. Service desk work is the strongest area, with scores clustering at 7-8: email, chat, phone and social feed one queue; incidents, service requests and major incidents are distinct types; and optional AI triage, summarisation and knowledge discovery are documented as routed to OpenAI and disablable. Deployment and integration holds at 6 on 293 catalogued integrations, an on-premise edition and migration from 90+ platforms with a free demo run. Change and problem is the weakest area: five judges scored 3-4 for named modules alone, while the change and configuration manager judge scored 0 on every criterion, a weighted total of 0.0 against 5.2-5.9 for the others, finding no public information on change types, approvals, a change calendar or an exportable audit trail. Pricing transparency scores 5-6: the pages publish "£69 per agent, per month (billed annually)", but onboarding packages are required at a bespoke cost and we found no public price for the on-premise licence, so the full annual cost is not computable from public pages alone.
Speaks for it
- Service desk scores cluster at 7-8, on email, chat, phone and social feeding one queue with incidents, service requests and major incidents as distinct types
- Optional AI triage, summarisation and knowledge discovery are documented as routed to OpenAI, disablable, and not used to train its models
- Deployment and integration holds a steady 6, on 293 catalogued integrations, a maintained on-premise edition and migration from 90+ platforms with a free demo run and delta migration
- European accounts are described as hosted in self-contained, isolated AWS units solely for European customers, with 100% encryption including backups
- Pricing publishes "£69 per agent, per month (billed annually)" with end users and customers on the portal always free, and a ten-agent example of £690 monthly and £8,280 annually
Held against it
- Change and problem scores run 0-4: the modules are named, but we found no public information on change types, approvals, a change calendar or links between changes and configuration items
- Assets and CMDB scores at 4-5: module names cover CMDB, asset discovery, contracts and dependency mapping, but we found no public information on CI types and relationships, discovery platforms or Active Directory and Entra ID synchronisation
- Onboarding packages are required with purchase at a bespoke cost depending on scope, and we found no public price for the on-premise licence or its maintenance, so a full annual cost is not computable from public pages
- The captured pages give different statements on where European data is held: UK-based storage and self-contained EU data centres are both described
- The named subprocessors are all United States companies, optional AI functions route data to OpenAI, and we found no public information on a published data processing agreement
Best for
- You need omnichannel service desk intake — email, chat, phone and social into one queue — with end users and customers on the portal always free
- You are migrating from another help desk or ITSM platform and want import from 90+ platforms via API, CSV or database with a free demo migration and delta migration
- You want a UK vendor that documents AWS data centres within the European Union solely for European customer accounts, with a self-hosted option available
Avoid if
- You must show an auditor who approved which change and which incident it caused — change and problem is the bench's lowest band at 0-4
- You need a fully computable annual price before signing; onboarding packages are required with purchase at a bespoke cost depending on scope
- You require an EU contracting entity; the vendor is a UK company under English law with the ICO as supervisory authority
- You cannot accept United States subprocessors or optional AI routing to OpenAI; the published subprocessor list names only United States companies
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Service desk, incidents & requests | 3.5 of 5 |
| Change, problem & release management | 1.5 of 5 |
| Assets, CMDB & discovery | 2.5 of 5 |
| Self-service portal & service catalog | 2.5 of 5 |
| Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation | 3 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 3 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 3 of 5 |
Service desk, incidents & requests
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How tickets come in and get resolved: intake by email, portal, chat, phone and Microsoft Teams or Slack, incidents and service requests told apart, categories, priorities and an impact-urgency matrix, assignment rules and queues, SLAs with escalation and business hours, major incidents, templates and canned responses, a knowledge base for agents, automations and workflows, time tracking on tickets, and reports and dashboards on volume, resolution time and SLA compliance.
0 — Not a ticketing or service desk product; requests cannot be recorded and worked in it.
3 — Tickets from email and a web form with status, priority and assignment; SLAs, automation and reporting are basic or not described.
5 — Multi-channel intake (email, portal, chat or Teams), incidents and service requests told apart, assignment rules and queues, SLAs with escalation and business hours, an agent knowledge base, rule-based automations, and standard reports on volume, resolution time and SLA compliance.
8 — A visual workflow builder for any ticket type, major incident handling with communication to affected users, SLAs per service, customer and contract, skills- or load-based routing, time tracking on tickets, AI suggestions or classification with what they do stated, custom dashboards and scheduled reports, and a mobile app for agents.
10 — A service desk an organisation of thousands runs on: every workflow, form and SLA configurable without code and versioned, omnichannel intake with one history per requester, AI features documented with their data use and limits, operational level agreements and underpinning contracts tracked, and every report reproducible from an exportable ticket history.
The Service Desk Lead
Every channel we live in — email, chat, phone, social — feeds one queue, and incidents, service requests and major incidents are named as distinct record types, which is exactly the intake discipline I need. No-code workflows, tracked SLAs with SLA and KPI reporting, custom dashboards with scheduled reports, a knowledge base, timesheets and mobile apps cover my team's daily grind, and the AI is documented with what it does — triaging, suggested replies, summarisation and knowledge discovery. Skills- or load-based routing and how major-incident communication reaches affected users are not described on the captured pages, so I stop one notch short of the top level. 6 8 10 12
The MSP Owner
Email, chat, phone and social feed one queue, incidents and service requests are distinct, major incidents are named, and incidents are prioritised with SLAs tracked on the ITIL framework. No-code workflows, AI triage and suggested replies (routed to OpenAI, not used for training), timesheets, custom dashboards, scheduled reports and mobile apps are all listed. I stop short of the top band because SLAs per client and contract and communication to affected users during a major incident are not described on the captured pages. 6 8 10 12
The Change & Configuration Manager
Intake is well evidenced — email, chat, phone and social feeding one queue — with incidents, service requests and major incidents as distinct types, a knowledge base, no-code workflows, mobile apps, and custom dashboards, scheduled reports and SLA and KPI reporting. The AI triage, summarisation and knowledge discovery functions are documented with what they do and their data use: routed to OpenAI, disablable, and not used to train its models. We found no public information on communication to affected users during major incidents, business hours in SLAs, or time tracking on tickets, which keeps this below the top band. 2 6 8 12 13
The Municipal IT Lead
Every channel — email, chat, phone and social — feeds one queue, incidents and service requests are separate types alongside major incidents and a knowledge base, and SLAs are tracked on the ITIL pattern; no-code workflows, custom dashboards with scheduled reports and data export, mobile apps, and AI triage, summarisation and suggested replies are all published, with the AI functions' routing to OpenAI stated and disablable. Business hours, escalation rules and per-service SLA terms are not described on the captured pages, so I would verify those in a pilot before any tender. 6 8 10 12
The Solo IT Admin
Email, chat, phone and social all feed one queue, incidents and service requests are told apart, and there are no-code workflows, custom dashboards, scheduled SLA and KPI reports, mobile apps and AI triage with suggested replies — enough for me to run my inbox through it. The captured pages stop short of showing major incident communication to affected users, per-service or per-contract SLAs, or skills-based routing, so it sits just under the top band. 6 12 10
The Skeptic
Multi-channel intake where email, chat, phone and social feed one queue, incidents and service requests as named types, major incidents, a knowledge base, no-code workflows, SLA and KPI reporting with custom dashboards, scheduled reports and mobile apps are all documented, and the AI functions state their data use — optional triage, summarisation and knowledge discovery route to OpenAI and can be disabled. We found no public information on SLAs per service or customer, skills- or load-based routing, or communication to affected users during major incidents. 6 8 10 12
Change, problem & release management
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The ITIL processes behind the ticket: problem records linked to incidents with root cause and known errors, change requests with standard, normal and emergency types, risk and impact assessment, approvals and a change advisory board, a change calendar with blackout periods, release and deployment records, links between changes, problems, incidents and configuration items, process certifications (PinkVERIFY, PeopleCert/AXELOS) named with their scope, and audit trails that a regulated buyer can show an auditor.
0 — No change or problem management of any kind; only tickets.
3 — A change or problem ticket type with a status and an approval step; change types, risk, calendar and links to incidents are basic or not described.
5 — Problem records linked to incidents with root cause and known errors, change requests with standard, normal and emergency types, multi-step approvals, a change calendar, changes linked to incidents and configuration items, and an audit trail of who approved what.
8 — Risk and impact assessment that reads affected services from the CMDB, a CAB workflow with agenda and decisions recorded, blackout periods and collision detection on the change calendar, release management with deployment tasks, change templates for standard changes, and an ITIL process certification named with the processes it covers.
10 — Change and problem management a regulated organisation can be audited on: every process configurable and versioned, change success and failure rates reported, a full trail from incident through problem and change to release exportable, the mapping to ISO/IEC 20000, ITIL 4 or DORA requirements documented, and certifications published with their scope and date.
The Service Desk Lead
Change management and problem management are listed as modules, the incident page says the product follows the ITIL framework, and changes and problems appear as migratable record types — but that is all the depth the captured pages give. I found no public information on problem records with root cause and known errors, change types with approvals, a change calendar, links to configuration items or an audit trail an auditor could read, which caps this low. 6 10 18
The MSP Owner
Change management and problem management are named modules alongside major incidents, the incident page names ITIL, and the migration service carries changes and problems as data types. But change types, risk assessment, a change calendar, links to configuration items and any advisory board are not described, and no ITIL process certification is named — a named capability without documented depth. 6 10 18
The Change & Configuration Manager
Change management, problem management and major incidents are named modules with dedicated feature pages, and changes and problems are migratable record types with attachments and custom fields — but the captured material says nothing about standard, normal and emergency change types, approvals, a change advisory board, risk and impact assessment, blackout windows, or links between problems, incidents and configuration items. As someone who has to show an auditor who approved which change and which incident it caused, I found no public information on any exportable approval or audit trail, so this rests at the basic level. 3 6 14 18
The Municipal IT Lead
Change management and problem management are named modules of the ITSM suite and the platform carries approval workflows, but the captured pages give no change types, risk assessment, change calendar, CAB or links between changes, problems and configuration items. I found no public information on release management or an ITIL process certification, which matters to us under IT-Grundschutz. 3 6 14
The Solo IT Admin
Change management, problem management and major incidents are named as modules on the pricing page, and the migration service lists changes and problems among the record types it moves. Beyond that, the captured pages don't describe change types, approvals, a change calendar or links between changes, problems and configuration items, so I can only credit that the ticket types exist. 6 18
The Skeptic
Change management, problem management and major incidents appear as named items, the incident management page says the ITIL framework is followed, and the migration tool moves changes and problems — but that is the whole of it. We found no public information on change types, approvals, a change calendar or CAB, risk and impact assessment, known errors, or links between changes, incidents and configuration items; I have seen 'change management' mean a status field, and these captured pages do not yet prove otherwise. 6 10 18
Assets, CMDB & discovery
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the product knows about the things tickets are about: an asset inventory of hardware, software and licences, a CMDB with configuration item types, attributes and relationships, a service map or dependency view, agent-based or agentless discovery, imports and synchronisation from Active Directory, Entra ID, Intune, SCCM, JAMF or a discovery tool, software licence compliance, contracts, warranties and the asset life cycle, and assets linked to users, tickets and changes.
0 — No asset or configuration data at all; tickets cannot be linked to devices or services.
3 — A list of assets with basic fields that can be linked to a ticket; relationships, discovery and licences are basic or not described.
5 — An asset inventory of hardware and software, a CMDB with configurable CI types and relationships, network discovery or an inventory agent, an import or sync from Active Directory or Entra ID, contracts and warranties per asset, and assets linked to users, tickets and changes.
8 — A visual service and dependency map used for impact analysis, discovery documented for named platforms (Windows, macOS, Linux, network devices, cloud accounts), connectors to named sources (Intune, SCCM, JAMF, VMware, AWS, Azure), software licence compliance and metering, the full asset life cycle from purchase to disposal, and data quality rules for the CMDB.
10 — A CMDB an organisation can trust for audits and outages: a documented data model with reconciliation of several sources, CI history and change tracking, service models from business service to infrastructure, licence optimisation for named vendors, and every CI and relationship exportable and reachable by API.
The Service Desk Lead
The pricing page names a CMDB, asset discovery, software asset management, contracts and warranties, dependency mapping and stock and inventory — the module names cover most of a working asset practice, including warranty tracking I actually use. What the captured pages do not show is how configuration items are typed and related, an import or sync from Active Directory or Entra ID, or how assets link to tickets and users, so I cannot go higher than the middle. 6
The MSP Owner
The asset list names CMDB, asset discovery, software asset management, contracts and warranties, dependency mapping and stock, plus forty-three asset management integrations. The captured pages do not describe CI types and relationships, discovery detail per platform, or an Active Directory or Entra ID sync; we found no public information on those. 6 19
The Change & Configuration Manager
The asset and configuration module names a CMDB, asset discovery, software asset management, contracts and warranties, dependency mapping and stock, which is more than a flat asset list, and there is a dedicated asset discovery page plus 43 asset-management integrations. But we found no public information on configurable CI types and relationships, discovery methods and platforms, synchronisation from Active Directory, Entra ID or device management tools, or assets linked to users, tickets and changes — so on this evidence I cannot read change risk out of this CMDB through service dependencies. 4 6 15 19
The Municipal IT Lead
CMDB, asset discovery, software asset management, contracts and warranties, dependency mapping and stock are all published modules, and 43 asset-management integrations are catalogued — enough for an inventory with contracts attached. Configuration item types and relationships, the discovery platforms covered, Active Directory synchronisation and whether assets link to tickets and changes are not described on the captured pages. 4 6 15 19
The Solo IT Admin
The pricing page names CMDB, asset discovery, software asset management, contracts and warranties, dependency mapping and stock, which is the core of an inventory I could hang tickets on. What the pages don't show is how discovery works, which platforms it scans, or a sync from Active Directory or Intune — and automatic laptop and licence discovery is exactly what I need to kill my spreadsheet. 6 19
The Skeptic
The pricing page names a CMDB, asset discovery, software asset management, contracts and warranties, dependency mapping and stock and inventory, and an integration directory counts 43 asset management connectors — all as single bullet points. We found no public information on configuration item types and relationships, the platforms discovery covers, synchronisation from Active Directory or Entra ID, or how assets link to users, tickets and changes; a CMDB is a list of devices until a relationship is shown. 6 19
Self-service portal & service catalog
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What employees or clients see: a self-service portal with the service catalog, request forms with fields and approvals per service, ticket status and history for the requester, a searchable knowledge base for end users, announcements and outage notices, a virtual agent or chatbot, password reset or other automated fulfilment, branding and languages, single sign-on for the portal, access from Teams or a mobile app, and satisfaction surveys.
0 — No portal or end-user access of any kind; requests can only be emailed or phoned in.
3 — A web portal where users open tickets and see their status; a catalog, knowledge base and approvals are basic or not described.
5 — A branded portal with a service catalog, request forms with approval steps, an end-user knowledge base with search, ticket status and history, announcements, single sign-on, several languages, and satisfaction surveys after resolution.
8 — A service catalog with conditional forms, costs and delivery times per item, automated fulfilment for named requests (password reset, software install, onboarding), a virtual agent in the portal and in Teams or Slack, deflection measured, portals per client or department, and accessibility (WCAG) stated.
10 — A portal that runs as the front door of the organisation: catalog, forms and fulfilment built without code and reused across IT, HR and facilities, the virtual agent documented with its sources and data use, deflection and satisfaction reported per service, and accessibility conformance published with its level.
The Service Desk Lead
A self-service portal, live chat and CSAT surveys are listed, end users and customers on the portal are always free, and approval workflows and an employee portal appear under enterprise service management with a single sign-on category in the integration directory — that reads like a portal my 1,400 people would use. The captured pages never name a service catalog with request forms, a searchable end-user knowledge base, announcements, branding or languages, and the virtual agent and deflection measurement are not described, so I keep it mid-range. 6 19
The MSP Owner
A self-service portal with live chat, CSAT surveys and approval workflows is listed, and end users and customers accessing the portal are always free — good for my sixty clients. But a service catalog, end-user knowledge base, portal branding, single sign-on for the portal and portals per client are not described on the captured pages. 6
The Change & Configuration Manager
A self-service portal with live chat and CSAT surveys is evidenced, end-users and customers on the portal are always free, and there are dedicated pages for the portal, knowledge management and a virtual agent. We found no public information on a service catalog, request forms with per-service approvals, announcements, branding or languages, so this sits a notch above a basic open-and-view portal. 5 6 16 17
The Municipal IT Lead
A self-service portal and an employee portal serving HR, finance and facilities with approval workflows and multi-department routing are published, together with a knowledge base, live chat, CSAT surveys, single sign-on integrations, and portal end users are always free — a virtual agent page is also in the registry. A service catalog with request forms, branding, languages and accessibility are not described, so I cannot confirm from public pages what my teachers and clerks would actually see. 5 6 17 19
The Solo IT Admin
A self-service portal where end users are always free, approval workflows, CSAT surveys, a knowledge base and AI conversational agents are all listed, and single sign-on appears in the integration catalogue. Branding, languages, announcements and whether requesters see their own ticket history aren't described, so it reads as a solid standard portal rather than more. 6 19
The Skeptic
A self-service portal that end users and customers access free of charge is documented, alongside live chat, CSAT surveys, approval workflows, an employee portal with multi-department routing, and AI agents marketed for the portal side of the product. We found no public information on the service catalog, request forms, end-user knowledge base search, announcements, single sign-on for the portal, branding, languages, automated fulfilment or accessibility. 6 16 17
Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the product is run and connected: a cloud edition and an on-premise or open-source edition with feature parity stated, system requirements and update cadence, a documented REST API and webhooks, integrations with Microsoft 365, Teams, Entra ID, Slack, monitoring tools, RMM and remote support tools, single sign-on (SAML, OIDC) and SCIM, roles and permissions, multi-client or multi-tenant operation with separated data for MSPs, time and contract billing for MSPs, a migration path from other tools, and a public status page.
0 — No documented way to run, connect or administer the product.
3 — Runs as one edition with user roles and an email connection; the API, integrations and other editions are basic or not described.
5 — A documented REST API, integrations with Microsoft 365, Teams and Entra ID or Active Directory, single sign-on, role-based permissions, at least one monitoring or remote support integration, and either an on-premise edition or a stated hosting model with uptime terms.
8 — Cloud and on-premise or open-source editions with feature parity stated, webhooks and an integration marketplace, SCIM provisioning, multi-tenant operation with separated client data for MSPs, time and contract billing, named RMM and monitoring connectors, a documented migration from named tools, and a public status page with uptime history.
10 — Operation at scale and on the customer's terms: open-source code under a named licence or a self-hosted edition with full parity, configuration as code or a staging-to-production transport documented, an API covering every object, high availability and disaster recovery documented, and SLA and support terms published.
The Service Desk Lead
An on-premise edition is real — a bundled on-premise patch release is published — an API is evidenced by the security pages describing token verification on API requests, and an integration directory lists 293 integrations across Microsoft, alert management, remote support and single sign-on, plus a migration service from 90+ help desk and ITSM platforms via API, CSV or database with a free demo migration. Feature parity between cloud and on-premise, webhooks, SCIM provisioning, named RMM connectors and an uptime history on the trust portal are not described on the captured pages, which keeps me between the two levels. 8 10 18 19
The MSP Owner
There are 293 integrations across remote support (12), alert management (27), Microsoft (22) and single sign-on, an on-premise edition exists (a patch release for on-premise 2.208.71 is published), an API middleware is described, and migration from 90+ platforms with free demo and delta migration is documented. Billing modules include time and material billing, recurring billing, quote-to-invoice and timesheets — but webhooks, SCIM, multi-client data separation, a public status page and cloud/on-premise feature parity are not described. 6 8 10 18 19
The Change & Configuration Manager
There is an on-premise edition with versioned patch releases, deployment across six AWS regions in an N+1 configuration with auto-scaling, a 293-item integration directory with named categories including Microsoft, single sign-on, remote support and alert management, a migration service covering 90+ platforms with delta migration and a free demo run, and a service level agreement annexed to the published terms. We found no public information on stated feature parity between the cloud and on-premise editions, webhooks, SCIM provisioning, multi-tenant operation with separated client data for service providers, or a public status page with uptime history, which holds it below the top band. 10 11 18 19
The Municipal IT Lead
An on-premise edition exists and is actively maintained — a bundled patch for a.NET CVE against on-premise 2.208.71 is published — and the privacy policy covers self-hosted environments; 293 integrations are catalogued across Microsoft, single sign-on, remote support and alert management, and a migration service covers 90+ platforms with a free demo and delta migration. Feature parity between cloud and on-premise, webhooks, SCIM provisioning, multi-client separation and a public status page are not described. 8 9 10 18 19
The Solo IT Admin
There's an on-premise edition with its own patch releases, 293 integrations grouped by category including Microsoft, alert management, remote support and single sign-on, and a migration service covering 90+ platforms with free demo runs — that suggests a fast setup with my stack. Feature parity between cloud and on-premise, webhooks, SCIM and a public status page aren't described, so I can't confirm everything I'd want to connect. 19 18 10 6
The Skeptic
A directory of 293 integrations across categories including Microsoft, remote support, alert management and single sign-on, migration from 90+ help desk and ITSM platforms with a free demo migration and delta migration, an on-premise edition (a bundled patch release names version 2.208.71), and N+1 architecture across six AWS regions with tested backups and release notes give a solid picture of how the product runs and connects. We found no public information on cloud versus on-premise feature parity, SCIM provisioning, multi-client operation with separated data for MSPs, or a public status page; the service level agreement is referenced only as an annex to the terms. 8 10 11 18 19
European sovereignty
panel opinion
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where tickets, attachments, user directories and CMDB data are stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, email delivery, AI features, support and payment tools). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; a service desk holds personal data about every employee and often credentials and network details, so the whole chain counts, not only the database. An on-premise or open-source edition the customer runs on its own European servers counts as the customer's chain, whatever the vendor's seat.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.
3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.
5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (email delivery, AI features, support access, payment) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard, or the vendor is non-EU with an EU data centre option.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, BSI C5, SOC 2) stated — or an on-premise edition documented that keeps every record on the customer's own servers.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, or a self-hosted open-source edition with no call home, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Service Desk Lead
The GDPR page commits to AWS data centres inside the European Union used solely for European customer accounts, isolated and encrypted so no data ever leaves the EU, and a subprocessor list is published with countries, backed by EU Standard Contractual Clauses and UK IDTA safeguards plus stated ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2 and Cyber Essentials compliance. The contracting entity is United Kingdom-based with English governing law and a Scottish controller address, and a data processing agreement is not confirmed as published on the vendor's own captured pages, which is what holds it below the highest level. 7 8 9 10 11
The MSP Owner
The vendor is a UK company under English law with the ICO as supervisory authority; it offers isolated, encrypted AWS data centres in the EU reserved for European customers, publishes a subprocessor list with countries (all US-based: AWS, Microsoft, DocuSign, Customer.io, Xero, Datadog, NinjaOne, plus OpenAI for optional AI), relies on EU SCCs and the UK IDTA, and states ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2 and Cyber Essentials. A published data processing agreement and an EU contracting entity are not confirmed on the captured pages, though a self-hosted edition is mentioned. 7 8 9 10 11
The Change & Configuration Manager
The vendor is a UK company with a UK contracting entity, English law and the ICO as supervisory authority; for European accounts it uses self-contained AWS regions within the European Union solely for European customers, backups included, fully encrypted, with EU Standard Contractual Clauses and the UK IDTA for transfers, and a self-hosted edition is documented for those who install on their own servers. Subprocessors are listed with locations (AWS, Microsoft, DocuSign, Customer.io, Xero, Datadog and NinjaOne, all United States), ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2 and Cyber Essentials are stated with details on request, and optional AI functions route data to OpenAI. For a bank answering to BaFin the seat remains third-country and we found no public information on a published data processing agreement or an EU representative, though the EU data-centre isolation is unusually explicit. 7 8 9 10 11
The Municipal IT Lead
For EU accounts the vendor publishes AWS data centres inside the European Union described as self-contained, isolated units used solely for European customers with 100% encryption, a subprocessor list with locations (largely US companies), EU Standard Contractual Clauses, and ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2 and Cyber Essentials stated. The contracting entity is a UK company under the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts, the optional AI functions route data to OpenAI, and I found no published data processing agreement and no confirmation that the on-premise edition keeps every record on our own servers — my data protection officer will need all of that in writing before sign-off. 7 8 9 10 11
The Solo IT Admin
AWS hosting with isolated EU data centres that keep EU customers' data and backups in the EU, subprocessors listed by country, ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2 and Cyber Essentials stated, EU SCCs for transfers, and a self-hosted option for my own chain. The contracting entity is UK rather than EU, the optional AI functions route data to OpenAI, and most of the listed subprocessors are US companies, which keeps it below the top band. 9 8 10 7
The Skeptic
There is real evidence here: self-contained, encrypted AWS units in the European Union used solely for European customer accounts including backups, a named subprocessor list with countries, EU Standard Contractual Clauses and the UK IDTA, ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type 2 stated, and an on-premise edition — though certification details are 'on request' rather than published, and optional AI functions route data to OpenAI. The contracting entity is United Kingdom with the ICO as supervisory authority, most named subprocessors are United States companies, and the captured pages give different statements on where European data is held: UK-based storage and self-contained EU data centres are both described. 7 8 9 10 11
Pricing transparency
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per agent, technician or analyst and tier, whether requesters and portal users are free, what counts as an asset or node and how it is priced, which modules (CMDB, change, asset discovery, AI, ESM) cost extra, the on-premise licence or subscription and its maintenance, the free or open-source edition and paid support, minimum term, onboarding and setup.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free edition exists, but how cost scales with agents, assets or modules is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their price per agent and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (asset packs, CMDB or discovery, AI features, on-premise licence, onboarding) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (agents, assets, clients), add-ons and asset packs priced, the on-premise licence and maintenance or the open-source support plans priced, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given number of agents, assets and modules, cloud or on premise, with every add-on, setup, training, support and overage fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Service Desk Lead
£69 per agent, per month billed annually is public, with a published example of ten agents at £690 monthly, end users and customers on the portal always free, a $1M per year enterprise package with unlimited licenses, a 15% not-for-profit discount, VAT treatment, 30-day payment terms, a 5% annual increase cap and £149 per hour for additional services. What I cannot compute is the real year-one cost: onboarding packages are required with purchase but bespoke-priced by scope, and the on-premise licence and its maintenance are unpriced on the captured pages. 6 11
The MSP Owner
The pricing page shows "£69 per agent, per month (billed annually)", free end users, a ten-agent example at "Annual Total £8,280", a "$1M per year" unlimited enterprise package and a 15% not-for-profit discount, with 30-day payment terms, UK VAT treatment, a 5% or RPI increase cap and auto-renewal on 30 days' notice in the terms. But onboarding is required at "a bespoke cost depending on scope", and on-premise licences and module add-ons are unpriced — I cannot compute a full annual cost for my twenty-two technicians from public pages alone. 6 11
The Change & Configuration Manager
The per-agent price is public at £69 per agent, per month (billed annually), with a worked example of £690 monthly and £8,280 annual total for ten agents, end-users and portal customers are always free, and a fixed $1M per year enterprise package with unlimited licences and funded implementation exists; the terms also state UK VAT treatment, 30-day payment, auto-renewal with 30 days' notice and a 5 percent or RPI increase cap. However onboarding packages are required and priced bespoke by scope, and we found no public information on tier inclusions, per-asset pricing, CMDB and discovery or AI add-ons, or the on-premise licence and its maintenance — so a buyer cannot compute the real annual cost from public pages alone. 6 11
The Municipal IT Lead
£69 per agent, per month billed annually is published, portal end users are free, not-for-profit organisations get 15% off, there is a fixed $1M per year unlimited package and £149 per hour for additional services, and the terms state VAT, 30-day payment, auto-renewal with 30 days notice and a 5% or RPI increase cap. Onboarding is required with purchase at a bespoke cost depending on scope, and we found no public prices for the on-premise licence or for how assets, AI or other add-ons scale — my procurement office cannot compute a full annual figure from the public pages alone. 6 11 17
The Solo IT Admin
"£69 per agent, per month (billed annually)" with end users always free, a ten-agent example totalling £8,280 a year, "£149 per hour" for extra services, VAT treatment and 30-day payment terms all published. But onboarding packages are required with purchase at a bespoke cost depending on scope, and no on-premise licence price appears, so I still can't compute my full first-year cost from the website alone. 6 11
The Skeptic
A public price of '£69 per agent, per month (billed annually)', portal end users 'always free', a shown ten-agent total of '£690' monthly and '£8,280' annually, a fixed '$1M per year' enterprise package with unlimited licences and funded implementation, a 15% not-for-profit discount, and terms covering VAT, 30-day payment, auto-renewal with 30-day notice, a 5% or RPI increase cap, a 1% monthly late fee and a '£149 per hour' standard charge let a buyer get close to a real number. The required onboarding is 'a bespoke cost depending on scope' and we found no public information on the on-premise licence or any per-asset or module pricing, so the full annual cost is not computable from public pages alone. 6 11 17
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 6 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about HaloITSM
Is HaloITSM European?
Yes, though not from the EU. whats-best.ai classifies HaloITSM as UK / wider Europe.
Where does HaloITSM store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
Does HaloITSM have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 1 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to HaloITSM?
As of 2 Nov 2026, the panel rates ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus (3.5/5), Xurrent ITSM (3/5) and GLPI (3/5) highest among the other 14 IT Service Management products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is GLPI (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: HaloITSM alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 1 Nov 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Data processing agreement, Hosting location, Legal entity, Hosting options. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 171 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 24 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 13 compliance facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 13 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 11 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 5 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 hosting facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 data fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (19)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage (HaloITSM) www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (incident management) www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (change management) www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (asset management and CMDB) www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 Features page (self-service portal) www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Pricing page www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Company page www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Privacy policy www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Data protection page (GDPR) www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Security / trust page www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 11 Terms of service www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 12 Service desk, incidents & requests — found from sitemap www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 13 Service desk, incidents & requests — found from sitemap www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 14 Change, problem & release management — found from sitemap www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 15 Assets, CMDB & discovery — found from sitemap www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 16 Self-service portal & service catalog — found from sitemap www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 17 Self-service portal & service catalog — found from sitemap www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 18 Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation — found from sitemap www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →
- 19 Deployment, integrations & multi-client operation — found from sitemap www.usehalo.com Checked 1 Nov 2026 Details →