Compare
SuperIT vs Neo Agent
Autonomous AI technician
Neo and SuperIT want the same outcome and get there differently, and the difference is how the automation gets built. Both automate repeatable service work, and both are deeply configurable. The difference is the interface, not the depth. Neo configures through the UI: web forms, fields and point-and-click options, scoped to individual agents, with scheduling to match. SuperIT configures in natural language with an agent that writes the PowerShell, so the ceiling is whatever PowerShell can reach rather than whatever a form exposes, with secure credential storage so a workflow can talk to any API. Neo's way is the more familiar one and every option is visible on screen. Neo also runs work on a schedule, which SuperIT does not do today. Around the workflow, SuperIT is agentic first: engineers talk to it the way they would talk to any AI, and it reasons its way through a problem rather than following a flow you defined in advance. Its own endpoint agent and Digital Twin let it diagnose from live device state, and it curates your knowledge base as it works. Neo is the better fit if scheduled runs and point-and-click setup are the requirement. If the queue is full of things you could never have scripted, that is SuperIT.
At a glance
| Dimension | SuperIT | Neo Agent |
|---|---|---|
| Triage & ticket prep | Full AI triage and ticket preparation, informed by live device state as well as ticket history. | Triages tickets and checks similar ones, playbooks and documentation before acting. |
| Resolution model | Reasons through the incident; engineers can just ask it in chat. Runs service workflows too, with the agent judging when to fire one, inside your approval gates. | Runs the workflows and agents you configure, on the conditions you set, plus scheduled proactive work. |
| Setup & configuration | Connect the PSA, deploy the endpoint agent, set autonomy per customer. Little to define up front. | Individual agents and workflows configured per task, with scheduling to match. |
| Device & environment context | SuperIT endpoint agent alongside your existing RMM, feeding a live Digital Twin. Native Microsoft 365 and any public API. | Queries RMM, IdP, M365 and docs during ticket handling; no proprietary device twin. |
| Workflows & scripted actions | Configured in natural language with the agent, which writes the PowerShell, so the ceiling is whatever PowerShell can reach. Execute, approve and timing controls, plus secure credential storage for any API. | Configured workflows and agents are the core of the product, set up point-and-click in the UI, with scheduled runs. |
| Knowledge | Knowledge base curated live as the agent works, plus your Agent Skills. | Reads your existing playbooks and documentation; no live curation. |
| Stack alignment | Works with your existing PSA and RMM, and with anything exposing a public API. Nothing gets replaced. | Also an overlay on your PSA and RMM, with a broad published integration list. |
| Human role & approvals | Autonomy set per customer, from read-only to autonomous, with a human in the loop wherever you want one. | Propose, approve or autonomous per action, with None, Read or Write per tool. |
What Neo Agent is
Neo is an AI technician for MSPs, built around configured agents and defined workflows. It reads tickets, checks similar ones, playbooks and documentation, makes decisions, runs fixes and closes the loop. It works reactively from tickets and alerts, and proactively on scheduled audits, QBR reports and SLA sweeps. Neo positions against legacy RPA: the workflows are yours to define, but you do not need a dedicated automation engineer to build them.
Neo Agent strengths
- Point-and-click configuration in the UI, so agents and workflows can be set up without scripting skills.
- Scheduling is first class, so proactive audits, QBR reports and SLA sweeps run on their own cadence.
- Broad published integration surface: PSA, RMM, IdP, distributors (Pax8), docs and proactive ops.
- Mature human-in-the-loop controls: propose, approve or autonomous per action; None/Read/Write per tool.
- An Automation Report on day two that ranks automation opportunities from PSA history.
Honest limitations
- Workflows and agents have to be defined up front, so the setup effort lands before the value does.
- No first-class native chat for engineers, so it is less useful as the thing a technician just asks.
- Coverage is as good as the workflows you built, which makes unanticipated incidents harder to serve.
- No live knowledge base curation, so documentation stays a separate job.
- Credit plans are sized for steady volume, so a low-volume shop pays for headroom it does not use.
- SOC 2 Type II still in progress (Type I complete per Neo).
Resolution model
SuperIT: SuperIT reasons through the incident rather than following a flow you defined in advance. Engineers can simply ask it, in chat, the way they would ask any AI, and it can pick work up from your tickets. It investigates, executes approved fixes, verifies and closes. It runs the standard service workflows too, password resets, onboarding, offboarding and access requests, from its workflow engine, and the agent works out that a workflow is the right answer and when to run it, inside the approvals you set.
Neo Agent: Neo runs the workflows and agents you configure: it triages, executes L1 playbooks like password resets, MFA and onboarding, runs RMM scripts, logs time and closes tickets. Execution is driven by the conditions and triggers you define, and proactive agents handle scheduled operational work.
Same destination, different route. Both run the standard service workflows, password resets and onboarding among them, so the difference is what decides when one fires. Neo executes on the conditions you configured. SuperIT's agent judges that a workflow is the right answer and picks the moment, inside your approval gates. Outside the configured set, Neo runs what you built and SuperIT reasons about whatever arrives.
Setup & configuration
SuperIT: Less to configure. Connect the PSA, deploy the endpoint agent, set the autonomy level per customer, and it works from there. Knowledge base curation happens live as the agent works, rather than as a project.
Neo Agent: Individual agents and workflows are configured for specific tasks, with scheduling set to match. Powerful once built, and the building is up front.
This is the real decision between these two. Neo asks you to configure it up front through the UI, where every option is visible and nothing needs scripting. SuperIT asks you to describe what you want to an agent instead, and generalises to whatever arrives without being told first. Both end up automating the repeatable work, so the question is which way of configuring suits your team.
Workflows & automation
SuperIT: A mature workflow engine, not a side feature. Engineers build and refine PowerShell workflow actions working with the agent, for work such as onboarding, offboarding, access requests and password resets, and the agent decides when one needs to run. Controls cover who may execute, who has to approve and when an action is allowed to run, with secure credential storage so a workflow can reach any API. Actions can be exposed to Level 0 support or end users, and everything executes inside the same safety pipeline as the rest of the product.
Neo Agent: Neo's strength is the configured workflow and the scheduled agent, which is the core of the product. Configuration happens in the UI through forms, fields and point-and-click options, so it is approachable without scripting skills, and it can run work on a schedule.
Both do workflows properly, and both are deeply configurable. The difference is the interface, not the depth. Neo configures in the UI, where every option is on screen and nothing needs scripting. SuperIT configures in natural language with an agent that writes the PowerShell, so the ceiling is whatever PowerShell can reach rather than whatever a form exposes. Neo can run work on a schedule, which SuperIT cannot today.
Device & environment context
SuperIT: The SuperIT endpoint agent runs on Windows, macOS and Linux alongside the RMM you already have, and feeds a live Digital Twin: a continuously updated model of devices, network, identity and services and how they relate. Native integrations with Microsoft 365 and with any platform that exposes a public API add the rest of the context, and the actions to go with it.
Neo Agent: Neo queries RMM, IdP, M365, and docs in parallel during ticket handling. Strong API orchestration; device data comes from integrated tools rather than a proprietary twin layer.
Neo is strong on orchestration across tools. SuperIT runs its own endpoint agents, so stale GPO, Wi-Fi roam and profile corruption are visible to it. Those faults are invisible to anything reading only tickets and documentation.
Stack alignment
SuperIT: Works with your existing PSA and RMM: ConnectWise, Autotask, Halo, Syncro and others.
Neo Agent: Overlay on your PSA and RMM, similar model; Neo publishes a broad integration list.
Migration is not the deciding factor between these two. Depth of environment context and how you get billed are.
Human role
SuperIT: You set the level of autonomy per customer. The same agent can run read-only for one client, require a named approver for another and close autonomously for a third, with a human in the loop wherever you want one. It is configured to the service provider and to each of their customers, not set globally by us.
Neo Agent: Configurable per action: propose, approve or fully autonomous, with None, Read or Write per tool. Technicians stay in control with logged, reversible actions.
Both are genuinely configurable. The difference is that SuperIT's autonomy is set per customer, so one provider can run different levels of automation across a whole client base from one place.
Time to value
SuperIT: Set up and running in an hour, working tickets to resolution within 24 hours. Most customers reach significant automation within a month, once the third-party integrations are connected and the workflows are tuned. SuperIT also produces an Automation Report per customer and per service provider.
Neo Agent: Markets live in two hours, with a day-two Insights Report ranking automation opportunities from PSA history.
Close to parity on the artefact, since both produce an automation report from your own history. The difference is what happens after it: Neo's value follows the workflows you then build, where SuperIT is already working tickets.
Channels
SuperIT: Slack, Microsoft Teams, email through your ticketing system, web chat, and embedded in your existing customer portal such as CloudRadial or Desk Director. Engineers get the same agent in an interactive chat.
Neo Agent: Microsoft Teams, with an optional end-user bot and phone agent.
Neo packages more channel SKUs. SuperIT spends that effort on resolution depth, because a channel only helps if something at the other end can finish the job.
Trust & controls
SuperIT: Allowlist and blocklist policies, approval workflows, no-go zones, full audit logs and per-tenant isolation. ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type II and ISO 42001 are all in progress.
Neo Agent: None/Read/Write per tool, test mode, propose/approve/autonomous modes, SOC 2 Type I (Type II in progress).
Neo's permission granularity is mature and worth crediting. SuperIT pairs the same kind of gating with a Digital Twin boundary, so what an agent may touch is bounded by the environment itself.
Choose SuperIT if…
- The tickets that hurt are the ones nobody anticipated, so a generalised agent beats a defined workflow.
- You want engineers to just ask the agent, in chat, rather than configure an agent for the task first.
- You would rather what you pay track the outcomes delivered, triage, investigations, resolutions, knowledge and insights, than credits consumed.
- You want the knowledge base curated as the work happens rather than maintained separately.
- You want less to set up before it starts working.
Where Neo Agent stops short
- Workflows and agents must be defined before they deliver, so the effort comes before the value.
- There is no first-class native chat for engineers to work through.
- It reasons from tickets, playbooks and documentation rather than from live device state.
- It does not curate your knowledge base as it works.
- Credit plans are sized for steady volume, so a low-volume shop pays for headroom it does not use.
Common questions
Neo Agent vs SuperIT: how do I decide?
Decide how you want the automation built, because both are deeply configurable and the difference is the interface. Neo configures the way tooling has always been configured: web forms, fields and point-and-click options, a screen per decision. It works, every option is visible, and anyone who has set up an RMM will recognise it. SuperIT is configured by describing what you want to an agent, which writes the PowerShell. That gets you a result faster, because you are describing the outcome instead of hunting for the right field, and it reaches further, because the ceiling is whatever PowerShell can reach rather than whatever the form exposes, with secure credential storage so a workflow can reach any API. Neo makes this argument itself against legacy RPA: you should not need an automation engineer to build the flow. It goes one step further than Neo took it. You should not need to build the flow. Around the workflow SuperIT is agentic throughout, so engineers ask it in chat, it reasons through the problem, and its endpoint agent and Digital Twin let it investigate what is actually happening. Less to configure, faster to start, and much better on the incidents nobody anticipated. Neo's genuine edge is scheduled runs, which SuperIT does not do today.
Can we run Neo and SuperIT together?
Yes, and some MSPs should. They are strong in different places. Neo can keep the defined workflows and scheduled operational work it is built for, while SuperIT handles incidents, engineer chat and the long tail nobody scripted. SuperIT integrates with anything that exposes a public API, so the two coexist without a fight over the PSA.
How is SuperIT different from Neo?
Three things. SuperIT reasons rather than following a configured workflow, so there is far less to set up and it handles what you did not anticipate. It runs its own endpoint agent and Digital Twin, so it diagnoses from live device state rather than from tickets and documentation. And it curates your knowledge base as it works, which Neo leaves as a separate job. SuperIT also has a PowerShell execution environment with approval workflows for the times a scripted action is the right answer.
See how SuperIT works in your environment
The best comparison is your own queue. Book a demo and we'll walk through the ticket types that matter to you.