← All comparisons
Atlas Control vs HaloPSA
HaloPSA is deeply configurable and expects you to configure it. Atlas ships opinionated defaults and less surface to tune.
The short answer
HaloPSA is the stronger choice if you have a defined process you need the tool to match exactly, and someone to do that configuration. Atlas suits a team that would rather accept sensible defaults and start next week — and it carries the Australian commercial stack HaloPSA leaves to integrations.
Where Atlas is the better fit
- Far shorter setup. Opinionated defaults instead of a configuration project.
- Australian billing, distribution, domains and NBN built in.
- RMM, MDM and secure erase in the same product rather than integrated separately.
- One price with everything, no module-by-module build-up.
Where HaloPSA is the better fit
- Genuinely deeper PSA: workflow, approvals, contract and billing models Atlas does not match.
- Mature ITIL alignment — change, problem and release management as first-class processes.
- Much larger install base, partner network and implementation help.
- Proven at enterprise scale. Atlas is not.
Check these yourself
Competitor facts go stale, and we are not a neutral source. Confirm these before you decide either way:
- Whether your contract and billing models actually need HaloPSA’s depth, or whether they only look like they do.
- The real cost of implementation time, not just licence cost.
Atlas Control, plainly
- Pricing
- A$329 per user per month, GST included. One plan, every module, unlimited clients and endpoints.
- Trial
- Three months free, then six months at 50%.
- Origin
- Built by an Australian MSP for its own use, then opened up.
- Size
- Small and young. You will talk to the people who write the code.