Prometheus Group Alternatives
5 of 54 products that share a software category or a capability term with Prometheus Group, matched on what their records document.
Alternative products to investigate
Products whose records share the most documented attributes with Prometheus Group: Benchmark Gensuite, IAMTech iPermit, Metegrity Visions Enterprise, Pisys Permit to Work and Tekmon (alphabetical, not a ranking).
Tekmon pays for sponsored placements on this site; its place in this list follows the same rule as every entry. Prometheus Group record checked 11 October 2026. Sources and limitations in the Prometheus Group profile · How candidates are matched · Already using Prometheus Group? What to check before switching
Prometheus Group's own record: categories, offline status, pricing and trial
Software categories: Control of Work, Permit to Work, Asset Integrity Management and CMMS & Maintenance Management. Offline filter: Not yet classified. Pricing: Prometheus Group has no verified published paid amount recorded (model: “Custom quote”). Pricing sources checked 20 September 2026: selected sources reviewed. Trial: trial status not established.
- Benchmark Gensuite
Shares: Permit to Work
Why listed, where it differs, against Prometheus Group
Why listed: Categories shared with Prometheus Group: Permit to Work. Capability names sharing a term: Prometheus Group's “Electronic permit-to-work workflows” and Benchmark Gensuite's “Work permit lifecycle”; Prometheus Group's “Isolation and lockout/tagout management” and Benchmark Gensuite's “Lockout/tagout procedures”. Pricing: Benchmark Gensuite and Prometheus Group have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Offline filter: Benchmark Gensuite, partial offline workflow; Prometheus Group, not yet classified. Software categories assigned to Benchmark Gensuite only: Incident Management and ESG & Sustainability Reporting. Software categories assigned to Prometheus Group only: Control of Work, Asset Integrity Management and CMMS & Maintenance Management. Conditional in Benchmark Gensuite's record (2 of 4 capabilities): “Offline mobile capture” and “Initial injury reports from first aid responders”.
Against Prometheus Group: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Benchmark Gensuite, “Incident investigation”. Pricing model: Benchmark Gensuite, “Quote-based enterprise subscription”; Prometheus Group, “Custom quote”. Integration capabilities: Benchmark Gensuite, “Enterprise data exchange” (conditional); Prometheus Group, “Permit and barrier integration” (conditional).
- IAMTech iPermit
Shares: Control of Work and Permit to Work
Why listed, where it differs, against Prometheus Group
Why listed: Categories shared with Prometheus Group: Control of Work and Permit to Work. Capability names sharing a term: Prometheus Group's “Electronic permit-to-work workflows” and IAMTech iPermit's “Permit lifecycle governance”; Prometheus Group's “Isolation and lockout/tagout management” and IAMTech iPermit's “Isolation and LOTO control”.
Where it differs: Offline filter: IAMTech iPermit, partial offline workflow; Prometheus Group, not yet classified. Pricing: IAMTech iPermit publishes GBP15,000/year, Small package with up to 10 named users (check product, module and purchase scope); Prometheus Group has no verified published paid amount recorded. Software categories assigned to Prometheus Group only: Asset Integrity Management and CMMS & Maintenance Management. Conditional in IAMTech iPermit's record (2 of 3 capabilities): “Offline field access” and “AI-assisted oversight”.
Against Prometheus Group: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: IAMTech iPermit, “SIMOPS, MOPO and anti-clash checks” and “Competency verification” (2 of 5). Pricing model: IAMTech iPermit, “Published annual package bands”; Prometheus Group, “Custom quote”. Integration capabilities: IAMTech iPermit, “SSO and enterprise integration” (conditional); Prometheus Group, “Permit and barrier integration” (conditional).
- Metegrity Visions Enterprise
Shares: Asset Integrity Management, Asset Management and Inspection Management
Why listed, where it differs, against Prometheus Group
Why listed: Categories shared with Prometheus Group: Asset Integrity Management. Tags shared with Prometheus Group: Asset Management and Inspection Management. Capability names sharing a term: Prometheus Group's “Permit audits and reporting” and Metegrity Visions Enterprise's “Audit trails and standards-oriented reporting”; Prometheus Group's “Mechanical-integrity inspection records” and Metegrity Visions Enterprise's “Equipment and inspection history”. Pricing: Metegrity Visions Enterprise and Prometheus Group have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Software categories assigned to Prometheus Group only: Control of Work and Permit to Work. Conditional in Metegrity Visions Enterprise's record (2 of 6 capabilities): “Risk-based inspection” and “Integrity manuals and operating windows”.
Against Prometheus Group: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Metegrity Visions Enterprise, “Thickness and corrosion trending”. Integration capabilities: Metegrity Visions Enterprise, “CMMS, EAM and ERP integration” (conditional); Prometheus Group, “Permit and barrier integration” (conditional). Access, security and record controls: Metegrity Visions Enterprise, “Audit trails and standards-oriented reporting” (documented).
- Pisys Permit to Work
Shares: Control of Work and Permit to Work
Why listed, where it differs, against Prometheus Group
Why listed: Categories shared with Prometheus Group: Control of Work and Permit to Work. Capability names sharing a term: Prometheus Group's “Electronic permit-to-work workflows” and Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board”; Prometheus Group's “Isolation and lockout/tagout management” and Pisys Permit to Work's “Isolations”. Pricing: Pisys Permit to Work and Prometheus Group have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Offline filter: Pisys Permit to Work, partial offline workflow; Prometheus Group, not yet classified. Trial: Pisys Permit to Work, trial or demo on request; Prometheus Group, trial status not established. Software categories assigned to Prometheus Group only: Asset Integrity Management and CMMS & Maintenance Management. Conditional in Pisys Permit to Work's record (2 of 6 capabilities): “Mobile completion” and “Maximo linkage”.
Against Prometheus Group: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Pisys Permit to Work, “Access and retention”. Integration capabilities: Pisys Permit to Work, “Pisys PTW API” (conditional); Prometheus Group, “Permit and barrier integration” (conditional). Access, security and record controls: Pisys Permit to Work, “Access and retention” (documented) and “Permit audit trail and linked records” (documented).
- Tekmon
Shares: Permit to Work and CMMS & Maintenance Management
Why listed, where it differs, against Prometheus Group
Why listed: Categories shared with Prometheus Group: Permit to Work and CMMS & Maintenance Management. Capability names sharing a term: Prometheus Group's “Electronic permit-to-work workflows” and Tekmon's “Permit requests and approval routing”; Prometheus Group's “Permit audits and reporting” and Tekmon's “Configurable audit and inspection templates”. Pricing: Tekmon and Prometheus Group have no verified published paid amount recorded.
Where it differs: Offline filter: Tekmon, documented offline workflow; Prometheus Group, not yet classified. Trial: Tekmon, free trial documented; Prometheus Group, trial status not established. Software categories assigned to Tekmon only: Quality Management Systems (QMS). Software categories assigned to Prometheus Group only: Control of Work. Conditional in Tekmon's record (2 of 5 capabilities): “CAPA assignment and approval” and “ISO 9001 / ISO 22000 process templates”.
Against Prometheus Group: Documented, sharing no word with any capability, category or tag in the other record: Tekmon, “Cross-discipline quality and safety CAPA” and “Incident capture, routing and follow-up” (2 of 10). Pricing model: Tekmon, “Enterprise subscription; custom quote”; Prometheus Group, “Custom quote”. Integration capabilities: Tekmon, “ERP and reporting connections” (conditional); Prometheus Group, “Permit and barrier integration” (conditional). Access, security and record controls: Tekmon, “Document library with history and access control” (documented).
Continue the alternatives research
Check the same evidence-led view from each candidate's starting point; its matched set may differ because the documented record differs.
49 more not listed. Browse the Control of Work category.
Already using Prometheus Group? What its record leaves open
Limitations the Prometheus Group profile records:
- No public numeric subscription verified
- Cross-module workflows require integration and acceptance testing
- Mobile capability should not be generalized across the portfolio
Available only under stated conditions or not documented (checked 11 October 2026): Hot-work and confined-space permit configuration; Barrier-health and mitigation visibility; Permit and barrier integration; Offline Mobile EAM work execution; Mobile rounds, inspections, parts and media; Disconnected permit approval and release; Mechanical-integrity to CMMS handoff; Maintenance planning and scheduling; Shutdown, turnaround and outage management; Portfolio reporting and analytics. Check each against the contract you hold.
Listed candidates that document a capability with a related name (confirm the scope in a demo):
- “Hot-work and confined-space permit configuration”: Benchmark Gensuite's “Work permit lifecycle”, IAMTech iPermit's “Permit lifecycle governance”, Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board” and Tekmon's “Permit requests and approval routing”.
- “Permit and barrier integration”: Benchmark Gensuite's “Work permit lifecycle”, IAMTech iPermit's “Permit lifecycle governance”, Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board” and Tekmon's “Permit requests and approval routing”.
- “Mobile rounds, inspections, parts and media”: Benchmark Gensuite's “Inspection programs”, IAMTech iPermit's “Audit, inspection and corrective action”, Metegrity Visions Enterprise's “Equipment and inspection history” and Tekmon's “Configurable audit and inspection templates”.
- “Disconnected permit approval and release”: Benchmark Gensuite's “Work permit lifecycle”, IAMTech iPermit's “Permit lifecycle governance”, Pisys Permit to Work's “Permit board” and Tekmon's “Permit requests and approval routing”.
- “Maintenance planning and scheduling”: Tekmon's “Maintenance and asset workflows”.
Prometheus Group evaluation checks, for every candidate
- Functional depth: Check a permit's control requirements against your actual process. Source
- Usability & adoption: Observe field users completing a disconnected round. Source
- Implementation & TCO: Price the selected products, rollout and recurring support. Source
- Integrations & API: Verify the intended CMMS exchange and its operational ownership. Source
- Security & trust: Test permissions, stale-data warnings and authorized decisions. Source
Leaving Prometheus Group: what to plan for
- Work out which products you actually hold before drafting a replacement list. The record treats permitting, barrier monitoring, mobile maintenance, mechanical integrity, planning and outage management as separate scopes, and a contract may cover only some of them. An exit plan for permits does not move the inspection records, so each product needs its own owner, data inventory and cut-over date.
- Permits here are anchored to assets and locations in the enterprise asset system, so the history is only meaningful with that reference. Before exit, test an export of the full amendment and authorisation trail for a closed permit and check that the asset and location identifiers survive. A new tool will need a mapping to the same records, and the old trail may be your only evidence of who approved what.
- Never migrate in the middle of a live isolation. The record describes isolation templates, cross-referencing, point validation and tag printing, and a permit that is suspended, handed over or awaiting revalidation depends on those links. Choose a cut-over when open permits can be closed in the old system, keep it read-only afterwards, and check that nobody is relying on a printed tag from the old numbering.
Who may have reason to stay with Prometheus Group
- When the link to an established asset system is itself the requirement, that link is the reason to stay. The value described lies in keeping safety workflows tied to existing maintenance records, and buyers are told to weigh interface delivery, training and operating support next to licence cost. Replacing it may mean paying for that integration work a second time, with new testing and a new owner.
- Operators who run rounds and work orders without signal have documented offline handling for supported systems, and that is easy to lose. The same record is explicit that this does not extend to issuing or approving permits, or releasing an isolation, while disconnected. A replacement should be tested on both halves of the question, the maintenance side and the permit side, with separate evidence.
- Process-safety teams that read barrier status next to permits hold a specific arrangement. The record describes telemetry-driven barrier alerts and mitigation streams across assets and sites, together with a link to the permit product, but notes that visibility is not an automatic interlock. Check what your site relies on, because a replacement may offer only the display or only the block.
What to test in a trial of a replacement for Prometheus Group
- Cut the live data feed during the trial and see what the permit screen says. The record asks for warnings, fail-safe behaviour and override controls when telemetry goes stale, and for the rule that decides whether a degraded barrier blocks a permit or only informs it. A candidate that keeps showing the last good value without any visible age is the one to question.
- Create a competing update on the server while a handset is disconnected, then reconnect it. The record's own script does this on purpose to expose how duplicates, conflicts and partial uploads are handled for the supported maintenance systems. Run it for every candidate on your own ERP edition, because the result can differ with the version and objects involved.
- Make an inspection finding create a repair order, then break the exchange deliberately and repair it. Afterwards, reconcile the status in both systems and trace the repair back to the original inspection. The point is not that the link works on a good day, it is who notices the failure, how it is retried and which system is treated as the authority.
Conditions and sources in the Prometheus Group profile · Recorded commercial terms
Prometheus Group alternatives — frequently asked questions
Which Prometheus Group alternatives have published amounts?
Published amounts (see each profile's product, module and purchase scope): IAMTech iPermit. No verified published paid amount recorded: Benchmark Gensuite, Metegrity Visions Enterprise, Pisys Permit to Work and Tekmon. Prometheus Group has no verified published paid amount recorded.
Which Prometheus Group alternatives have a documented offline workflow?
Documented offline workflow: Tekmon. Partial offline workflow: Benchmark Gensuite, IAMTech iPermit and Pisys Permit to Work. Not yet classified: Metegrity Visions Enterprise. Offline filter: Prometheus Group, not yet classified.
Which Prometheus Group alternatives document a free trial?
Free trial documented: Tekmon. Trial or demo on request: Pisys Permit to Work. Trial status not established: Benchmark Gensuite, IAMTech iPermit and Metegrity Visions Enterprise. Trial: Prometheus Group, trial status not established.