Fairfield, NJ · Metro New York(888) 711-4521 · Toll-FreeBuilt & operated by Intelligent Automation
Comparisons of Record

Honest comparisons.

Four documents. Two vendors we contest, only on sourced public record. Two peers we respect and intend to out-depth. And on every one of them, in plain language, the buyer who should choose them instead of us.

4 comparisons · 2 contested on public record · 2 peers · prepared by Intelligent Automation, LLC · Fairfield, NJ · last reviewed 2026-07-27

Disclosure — before we say a word about anyone else

We have zero Argos OS customers.

Not a small number. Zero. Argos OS opens to its first cohort in September 2026, and every operational figure anywhere on this site was measured inside the MSP we run ourselves — 26 client companies, 1,301 tickets resolved end to end, one practice, operating since 2013. That is our own environment. It is not customer scale and we will not let it be read as customer scale.

Every vendor on the four pages below has something we do not: customers, years, a support organization, a partner ecosystem, and in most cases a product footprint broader than ours. That is not false modesty. It is the fact that makes the rest of these documents worth reading — a comparison written by the smaller party is only credible if the smaller party says so first.

So the disclosure sits at the top of every comparison page, above the table, before the argument. Structure is the argument. If we were willing to bury our own weakness beneath a feature grid, you would be right to assume we buried something else too.

The rules we compare by

Five rules. Published, so you can catch us breaking one.

We disclose before we attack. Our gaps appear above the comparison table on every page, not in a footnote under it. A vendor that shows you its weakness last is sequencing you. 01 — disclosure
We contest only on sourced public record. Where we raise a security incident it is a government advisory or a national vulnerability database entry, linked, with the scope stated the way the vendor themselves stated it. No anonymous forum screenshots, no “we’ve heard.” 02 — sources
We name who we respect. Syncro and HaloPSA are peers, not targets. They are built by people who understand this trade. Our claim against them is narrow, specific, and stated as such. NinjaOne is not on this page at all — Argos ingests from NinjaRMM, so they are a surface we read from, not a vendor we are trying to talk you out of. 03 — respect
Every page concedes a buyer. Each comparison ends by describing, sincerely, the MSP who should buy the other product. If we cannot name that person we do not understand the market well enough to be arguing about it. 04 — concession
We invent no pricing — for anyone. Not theirs, not ours. We describe pricing models — quote-gated, per-seat, per-module, multi-year auto-renewal — because a model is checkable and a number quoted second-hand is not. Our own pricing is not published yet; it goes on this site the day we open. 05 — pricing

Those rules cost us something. They rule out the comparison grid every vendor in this category ships — the one with a full column of green checks on our side and a column of red crosses on theirs, where the criteria were selected after the answer. That grid persuades nobody who has bought software before, and it tells the reader exactly one thing: that the vendor chose the questions.

The four documents

Two contested. Two peers.

The split is not about product quality. It is about how a company was assembled and how it behaves at renewal — the two things that determine what your stack costs you three years from now.

Argos OS vs Kaseya

CONTESTED
The roll-up model

Assembled by acquisition and unified at the login screen. We contest two things and only two: how the catalog was put together, and how it is sold to you — quote-gated, per-seat, per-module, on agreements that renew themselves.

The public record we cite is the 2021 attack in which Kaseya’s own RMM became the ransomware distribution vector, sourced to CISA. We raise it as a structural argument about concentration, not a moral one about a vendor.

Better for you if: you want one throat to choke, attached to a balance sheet far larger and older than ours.

Read the comparison

Argos OS vs ConnectWise

CONTESTED
The roll-up model

The same structural argument, a different catalog. Separate products, separate databases, one marketplace sold back to you as integration — and the integration labor lands on your technicians.

We cite the ScreenConnect authentication bypass rated CVSS 10.0 and ConnectWise’s own May 2025 nation-state breach disclosure — and we state the scope of that second one exactly as ConnectWise stated it, because overstating it would be the precise failure this site exists to attack.

Better for you if: you are already deep in the ecosystem with the integration work sunk.

Read the comparison

Argos OS vs Syncro

PEER
Respected, and out-depthed

Syncro does simple, affordable, all-in-one PSA and RMM genuinely well, and it publishes its pricing on its website — which is more than we can say today. We were a Syncro customer ourselves. That is not a rhetorical device; it is why we can be specific about what it does well.

Our claim is narrow: we go deeper on the security and compliance half, on the same data model, without you signing a second vendor relationship.

Better for you if: you want straightforward PSA and RMM at a fair price and you do not run a security practice.

Read the comparison

Argos OS vs HaloPSA

PEER
Respected, and out-depthed

HaloPSA is deep, highly configurable and well-regarded, with process maturity we are not going to pretend to match on every axis. If configurability is your buying criterion, they are excellent at it.

Our honest differences are two: we include the security and compliance plane rather than integrating to it, and we stand your instance up ourselves rather than handing you a configuration project.

Better for you if: your process is ITIL-mature and you have the internal capacity to configure a deep tool properly.

Read the comparison
Not on this page, on purpose

NinjaOne is not a competitor of ours.

Argos ingests from NinjaRMM. That is a supported, deliberate path in the product: device and patch state flow out of Ninja and into the client graph, where the ticket, the asset and the compliance control all read the same row. You will not find NinjaOne in a comparison table on this site, and you will not find it wearing a red cross on a feature grid, because we are not trying to talk you out of a tool we read from.

An operating system that insists on owning every layer is just a roll-up with better manners. What we insist on owning is the substrate — identity, the client graph, the event spine and the audit spine. Everything above it can be a citizen, including somebody else’s product.

A suite is twelve products that share a login screen. An operating system is twelve products that share a data model.

That sentence is the whole disagreement, and it is testable without our help. Ask any vendor in this category the same two questions we would want you to ask us. First: when I rename a client, how many systems have to be told? Then the harder one: show me the foreign key. A platform that shares a data model can point at the constraint. A platform that shares a login screen will describe a roadmap.

Run that test on us too. Then read what we have not finished and the claim ledger, where every number on this site carries its scope, its evidence, and — where a third party holds the record — a link to check it somewhere we have no authority.

Don’t trust us. Check us.

Own your stack. Make it talk to itself.

The comparison that settles it is the one you run yourself.

Argos OS soft-launches September 2026. The whole platform, white-labeled to your brand, free for 30 days — no card, no onboarding fee, no lock-in. We stand it up for you, and you export everything on any day you like, at no cost.

Secured by IA