Hasfy vs GLPI + a separate RMM: is juggling two tools still worth it?
Most IT service providers we talk to still run GLPI for ticketing and asset management, paired with a separate RMM (Datto, NinjaOne, Atera) for monitoring, and a third tool for billing. Three subscriptions, three interfaces, and data that never talks to each other.
Why this stack still exists
GLPI is free, open source, and genuinely good at ticketing and CMDB. The problem isn't GLPI itself: it doesn't do real-time endpoint monitoring, so it needs an RMM bolted on. And none of the RMMs on the market handle billing the way local providers need it.
The result: a technician opening a ticket in GLPI has to open a separate session in the RMM to check the machine's status, then a spreadsheet or a third tool to bill for time spent.
What it actually costs
Three separate subscriptions often add up to more than a unified platform, on top of the time lost switching between tools. On a team of 5 technicians handling 20 tickets a day, a few minutes lost per ticket switching tools easily adds up to half a day of productivity a week.
The most common friction points:
- No way to see a client's full history without opening 3 tools
- Time billing is done by hand, so hours go unbilled
- Monitoring data (RMM) and tickets (GLPI) are never automatically reconciled
- None of the tools are hosted locally, which raises questions for clients with data sovereignty requirements
What a unified platform actually changes
With Hasfy, the ticket, the machine record, the client history and billing all live in one place. A technician sees the machine's status directly from the ticket, without switching tools. Time billing happens automatically when the ticket closes.
GLPI is still a fine choice if...
To be fair: if your fleet is small, you don't need real-time monitoring, and you have time to maintain the GLPI instance yourself, the free stack is still defensible. Switching to a unified platform starts paying off once coordinating between tools costs more than the simplicity it saves.
