MSP project management software, compared
How the tools MSPs actually use to plan and deliver projects stack up — the native project modules in Autotask, ConnectWise and HaloPSA, the dedicated planners Moovila and Proxuma, Syncro, and Current. Sourced from vendors' own documentation; marked 'not documented' where a capability isn't public rather than assumed.
These tools fall into four honest groups: PSA-native project modules (Autotask, ConnectWise, HaloPSA), dedicated bolt-on planners (Moovila, Proxuma), an SMB all-in-one (Syncro), and Current — a modern delivery layer that syncs to your PSA.
| Capability | Current | Autotask Projects | ConnectWise | Moovila | Proxuma | Syncro | HaloPSA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gantt / timeline view | Yes — native Native Gantt/timeline boards plus a dependency map (@xyflow/react). | Yes — native Native Gantt with task bars, dependency arrows and editable milestones/dates. | Yes — native Native Gantt (reimagined work plan on the Asio platform) that renders predecessors/dependencies. | Yes — native Gantt View plus a Portfolio Timeline View; markets Critical Path view as a Gantt alternative. | Yes — native Full Gantt over every Autotask project; drag to reschedule/stretch task bars. | No No project Gantt; only a Calendar/appointments view. Project work lives in tickets. | Yes — native Native Gantt with inline (right-click) milestone/target-date editing; also List/Calendar/Kanban. |
| Critical-path analysis | Yes — native engine Real native critical-path engine with client-side cycle detection. | Not native / add-on No native critical-path documented; add-ons (e.g. TopLeft) market it. Based on documentation absence, not a vendor denial. | Not native / add-on Native Gantt does not appear to compute/highlight critical path; CP automation is a Moovila/TopLeft add-on. | Yes — core engine Dedicated Critical Path Engine with RPAX risk scoring, real-time date forecasting and auto-recasting. Its flagship strength. | No No critical-path engine documented; scheduling is manual drag/stretch of bars. | No No project-scheduling engine at all, so no critical path to compute (documentation absence). | Not native / add-on No native critical-path engine; delivered via the third-party Moovila Perfect Project integration. |
| Task dependencies (FS/SS/etc.) | Yes — dependency-aware Dependency-aware scheduling with a dependency graph and cycle detection. | Finish-to-start only API TaskPredecessor supports only successor-start = predecessor-end + lag; no SS/FF/SF types. | Yes — types not enumerated Native task predecessors set in the PSA; the specific FS/SS/FF/SF set is not publicly enumerated. | Yes — multiple types + lag Configurable dependency types with lead/lag time and inter-project dependencies (Business+). | ?Not documented No Proxuma page documents creating/editing predecessor links in its own Gantt; organizes by phases/tasks/hours. | No (parent/child only) Only parent/child ticket linkage (hierarchy/checklist), not scheduled predecessor-successor dependencies. | Yes — types not enumerated Native task date dependencies (Q1 2024) shift linked tasks 'based on dependency type'; type set not published. |
| Dependency-aware auto-scheduling | Yes — incl. back-scheduling Dependency-aware scheduling and back-scheduling across timeline, dependency map and what-if scenarios. | Basic cascade only Finish-to-start date shifting only; no resource-leveling / constraint-based scheduler documented. | ?Not documented as native Automatic cascading reschedule not documented as native; automated back-scheduling is a Moovila add-on. | Yes — auto-recasting Engine recalculates the whole timeline in real time; one-click auto-recasting of downstream dates. | No — manual only Rescheduling is explicitly manual drag/stretch; no engine that ripples a slipped predecessor. | No No dependencies or scheduling engine, so no successor auto-rescheduling (documentation absence). | Partial — date-shift + AI Dependency date-linking plus AI skills-based auto-scheduling; not a full constraint-based CPM scheduler. |
| Resource management & capacity planning | Availability-driven Availability/PTO-aware scheduling via resource_availability and what-if scenarios; not a multi-year capacity forecaster. | Report-oriented Allocation, timesheets and utilization reports; live capacity views commonly added via add-ons. | Solid, forecasting weaker Resource assignment by skills/availability and a dispatch portal; forward capacity forecasting less documented. | Yes — strong Capacity Conflict Analysis (intra-project and cross-portfolio) and utilization targets by user/role/enterprise. | Yes — flagship Capacity-based calendar, live per-day overbooking bars, capacity visibility years ahead. Its core product. | Basic assignment Techs assigned to tickets/appointments with per-tech calendar; no true capacity/utilization forecasting. | Native + add-on depth Agent Resource Booking and workload dashboards; advanced dispatch boards often via TopLeft/Moovila. |
| PTO / availability-aware scheduling | Yes PTO/availability-aware scheduling and back-scheduling across timeline, dependency map and scenarios. | Tracks PTO; scheduling unclear Tracks time-off requests/approvals; availability-aware auto-scheduling of task dates not documented. | ?Not documented Availability factors into dispatch and time-off is tracked; auto-scheduling around approved PTO not documented. | Availability + holidays Scans tasks/calendar and honors holiday calendars/hours of operation; a dedicated PTO/leave object is not documented. | Yes — Outlook-fed Capacity computed from service calls plus Outlook PTO/holidays/meetings; two-way Outlook sync. | No Calendar shows booked appointments but no availability/PTO model driving scheduling (documentation absence). | Calendar-aware AI auto-scheduling factors calendar availability; a dedicated PTO/leave-aware scheduler is not documented as native. |
| Kanban board | Yes — native Native drag-and-drop Kanban (@dnd-kit) for tasks. | No native project Kanban Ticket 'Board view' has Kanban swimlanes, but no native Kanban for PROJECT tasks; add-ons (TopLeft) add it. | Yes — native Ships a native Kanban board for projects in its Asio-native project experience. | Yes — native Kanban View included at Pro+; positioned for stand-ups. | Yes — writes back Kanban module where Autotask statuses are columns; moving a card changes status in Autotask. | No Tickets managed in list/table views by status; no drag-and-drop Kanban documented. | Yes — native Native Kanban view for projects/tasks; some partners offer enhanced board add-ons. |
| Milestones | Yes Milestones with scheduling/criticality. | Yes Native phases and milestones, including fixed-price billing milestones. | Yes Native milestones with milestone triggers and milestone-based billing. | Yes Milestones surfaced in the Critical Path view alongside dates/durations. | ?Not documented Product pages describe phases/tasks/hours; a milestone feature is not documented (low-confidence). | No No milestone objects; work tracked by ticket status/worksheet completion. | Yes Native milestones editable from the Gantt; surface bottlenecks in real time. |
| Portfolio / multi-project view | Yes Portfolio tiles/views across projects. | Report-driven Projects Dashboard and cross-project reporting; no dedicated real-time portfolio board. | Dashboards/reports Cross-project visibility via dashboards and custom reports rather than a portfolio Gantt/roadmap. | Yes Portfolio Timeline View, portfolio dashboards, RPAX portfolio analysis, cross-portfolio capacity. | Yes Every Autotask project on one timeline; filtered views per team/lead/client; bulk operations. | No No project entity, so no cross-project portfolio; oversight via ticket queues/KPI reports. | Yes Portfolio dashboards/reporting across projects incl. budget and workload. |
| Time tracking | Yes Native time entry that flows to your PSA for billing — Autotask, ConnectWise, or Halo PSA. | Yes — core Timesheets, real-time entry against tasks, approval workflows feeding billing. | Yes (UX complaint) Native billable time entry to invoicing; time-entry usability is a common review complaint. | Yes Rapid-Entry Time Log, Clock In/Out, timesheets; time entry built into MSP work tickets. | Planning layer Plans/allocates estimated hours and writes service calls to Autotask; time actuals live in Autotask. | Yes — native Billable/non-billable timers on tickets flow straight to invoicing within Syncro. | Yes Native time tracking with submit-review-approve; only approved time flows to billing. |
| Billing / PSA integration & source-of-truth | Syncs to PSA or native 'autotask_synced' keeps Autotask as billing source of truth (Current owns scheduling); or fully Current-native. Also integrates ConnectWise and Halo PSA. | Yes — is the PSA Autotask IS the PSA; time/milestones/expenses flow natively to contracts and invoices. Structural advantage. | Yes — is the PSA Native automated project/milestone billing; project time bills in the same platform, no external sync. | Bi-directional PSA sync Native bi-directional connectors to ConnectWise/HaloPSA/Autotask; PSA remains billing system. Connectors gated to higher/Enterprise tier. | Deep 2-way (Autotask) Real-time two-way Autotask sync via API+webhooks; Autotask stays system of record. Autotask-only today. | Yes — is the PSA All-in-one RMM+PSA on one data model; time converts to invoices natively. | Yes — is the PSA Approved time flows into native billing; invoices auto-generate from contracts; Xero/QuickBooks/Sage sync included. |
| Client / partner portal (with financial isolation) | Yes — DB-level isolation Partner portal with genuine DB-level financial isolation (RLS + partner-safe views + restrictive policies); partners never see financial data. | Exposes financials Client Portal/Taskfire lets clients view invoices and run reports by design; strict per-user financial hiding not documented. | Config-dependent Native portal surfaces invoices/balances to clients; a finance-isolated view depends on portal configuration. | Permission-scoped views Customers see 'only work that affects them'; shareable PDFs. No documented finance-isolated partner portal. | No portal Internal staff tool; no client/partner-facing portal or external isolation model. | Support/billing portal End User Portal exposes tickets, assets and invoices/payments; not a project portal and surfaces financials by design. | Portal exposes own invoices Strong self-service portal with granular permissions, but it exposes the customer's own quotes/invoices/contracts rather than isolating all financials. |
| Templates / playbooks | Yes — PMI playbooks PMI/post-merger playbooks and 24 managed-intelligence playbook templates per tenant. | Yes Native templates capturing tasks, dependencies, durations, roles and default budgets. | Yes Pre-built and custom project templates to standardize repeatable work. | Yes — + analytics Templates, AI template recommendations, and a Template Analytics module with deviation metrics. | Yes Build a template from scratch, a past project, or a library; template-to-timeline in minutes. | Ticket templates only Ticket Blueprints (incl. parent/child), Worksheets and Recurring Tickets; not scheduled project playbooks. | Yes — + AI from SOW Project/ticket templates for any methodology; AI can auto-generate a project from a Statement of Work. |
| Automation / workflow rules | Monitors + notifications Score/monitor engine (run_current_monitor) and notifications; not a general user-built trigger-action rules builder. | Yes Configurable Workflow Rules (notification, time-based, change-request) at ticket and task level. | Yes — mature Deep business-wide workflow engine; delegates projects/tasks via milestone triggers; Asio adds RPA. | Engine-driven only Auto-recasting, alerts and supervised auto-dispatch; no configurable trigger-action rules builder documented. | Sync-driven + shifts Automation is mostly two-way sync plus a Shifts rotation/load-balancing module; no general rules engine. | Yes — strong Condition/action Ticket Automations across the lifecycle, Workflows, recurring tickets, scripting. | Yes — deep Broad workflow engine (creation, status-change, field-change triggers) for routing, SLA, escalations, notifications. |
| Microsoft 365 integration (SharePoint/Teams/Calendar) | Yes — via Graph SharePoint, Teams and Calendar integration via Microsoft Graph. | Teams native; rest via connectors Native Teams integration and Sync 365 user/contact sync; deeper SharePoint/Calendar via Graph connectors. | Teams + calendar Teams via Sidekick and calendar sync; SharePoint document tie-ins generally via third-party connectors. | Storage/calendar/Teams SharePoint/OneDrive as storage, Outlook calendar, and Teams; deep SharePoint co-management not documented. | Outlook only Two-way Outlook Calendar sync and M365 as a Power BI source; no SharePoint/Teams integration documented. | Calendar + mgmt/backup Two-way Outlook calendar sync; M365 security/identity mgmt and backup, not project collaboration. | Strong Teams/email/Entra Strong Teams, O365 email/calendar and Entra ID; native SharePoint project-document integration not documented. |
| AI insights | Yes — Anthropic AI insights powered by Anthropic across the platform. | Ticket-centric Cooper Copilot (summaries, triage, QBRs) is mature but service-desk focused; no documented project-delivery AI. | Ticket-centric Sidekick AI (classification, summaries, resolutions, sentiment) in Teams; no documented project-management AI. | Yes — project AI RPAX autonomous risk scoring, Project Debugger/Remediation Wizard, AI 'project coach' — genuine delivery AI. | BI/Copilot-oriented AI framed around the Power BI/MCP/Copilot layer; an in-app 'AI plan assistant' is vendor-described but not detailed. | Ticketing only AI ticket classification, summarization and sentiment; no AI over project health or schedule risk. | Yes — extensive AI report insights/forecasts, ticket clustering, MCP endpoint, AI project-from-SOW, skills-based auto-scheduling. |
| Modern UI & architecture (recency of rebuild) | 2026 ground-up rebuild Fully rebuilt/renamed Cascade→Current in 2026 on React 19 + Supabase. | Dated Widely-cited dated, overwhelming UI; ~20-year platform with features layered on, no ground-up rebuild. | Rebuild in progress Legacy Manage UI criticized as clunky; modern 'PSA powered by Asio' rolling out since mid-2025. | Modern, some clutter Founded 2016; GUI often praised but some reviewers describe the layout as cluttered. | Purpose-built recent Founded 2023, live 2025-26; modern drag-and-drop interface, SOC 2 Type I. | Clean model, dated UI Architecturally clean single data model, but the interface is frequently criticized as dated/dense. | Modern rewrite Current product is a rewrite (~2019 rebrand), Azure-hosted, weekly release cadence with public roadmap. |
| Setup / onboarding effort | Modern self-serve Modern SaaS with transparent per-seat pricing; low-friction adoption alongside your PSA. | High effort Steep learning curve and complex setup; third-party TCO estimates cite tens of thousands in year-one implementation. | High effort Steep learning curve (weeks of training); implementation commonly runs from hundreds to $20,000+ (third-party). | Non-trivial Reviewers note setup can be time-consuming; guided onboarding/CP training gated to higher tiers. | Fast Layers onto Autotask; vendor claims 'go live in 24 hours'; 14-day no-credit-card trial. | Fast Widely praised for a small learning curve and quick time-to-value; 14-day no-credit-card trial. | Steep + paid onboarding Steep learning curve and a required paid onboarding package (third parties cite ~$4,000 minimum); not turnkey. |
| Pricing model & public price | Transparent — $50/user/mo Public pricing: $50/user/month or $540/user/year. | Quote-based, no public price No official public price or free trial; third-party estimates ~$90-$145/user/mo effective (not vendor-published). | Quote-based, no public price No public price; third-party estimates ~$35-$65+/user/mo (some cite $60-85); implementation extra. | Partly public Pro $11/user/mo published; Business and Enterprise are contact-for-pricing; MSP PSA-sync tier not transparently priced. | Model public, price hidden Per-role seat model (EUR) is public but per-seat prices show only via a calculator or demo; longer terms carry an unspecified discount. | Transparent public price Public per-tech pricing: Core $129, Team $179 per user/mo (annual); unlimited endpoints. | Public single price + onboarding fee All-inclusive £66/agent/mo (annual), no tiers; a bespoke paid onboarding fee applies on top. |
| Best-fit user | Modern delivery + partner isolation MSPs wanting purpose-built dependency-aware/critical-path delivery, a financially-isolated partner portal, and billing sync to their PSA — Autotask, ConnectWise, or Halo PSA. | All-in-one PSA MSPs Mid-market/enterprise MSPs on Kaseya/Datto IT Complete wanting projects inside their PSA of record. | Consolidating MSPs Mid/enterprise MSPs consolidating ticketing+time+billing+CRM+projects into one PSA and willing to invest in config. | Dependency-heavy delivery MSPs/PMOs delivering structured, repeatable projects who want autonomous critical-path scheduling plus PSA sync. | Autotask capacity planning Autotask MSPs wanting visual capacity/resource planning and a shared timeline on top of Autotask as system of record. | Small SMB MSPs Small-to-midsize MSPs wanting one predictable all-in-one RMM+PSA; not for deep project scheduling. | All-inclusive PSA buyers Mid/large MSPs wanting one all-inclusive, highly configurable PSA with projects native to billing. |
Where each tool genuinely wins
We build Current, so weigh us accordingly — but a comparison you can't trust is worthless. Here's where each alternative is honestly stronger, and the context that matters for an MSP.
Autotask IS the PSA, so project time, milestones and expenses are billing-native with Autotask as the single financial source of truth — plus 20+ years of market maturity, a huge MSP install base, and the Kaseya/Datto IT Complete ecosystem (RMM, IT Glue, backup).
Where Current fits: Current is built to run alongside your PSA, not replace it: in 'autotask_synced' mode Autotask stays the billing source of truth while Current owns modern scheduling — so an Autotask shop keeps its billing record AND gets native critical-path, Kanban and a financially-isolated partner portal without ripping anything out, and Current syncs the same way with ConnectWise and Halo PSA.
All-in-one PSA breadth (ticketing, procurement, CRM, billing, projects in one system of record), a very large integration marketplace (several hundred partners), a mature business-wide workflow engine, and — with the Asio rebuild — native Gantt and native project Kanban.
Where Current fits: Breadth is not the same as depth in project delivery: critical-path automation still requires add-ons (Moovila/TopLeft), the legacy UI is still being migrated, and onboarding is heavy. Current integrates with ConnectWise (shipped 2026-07-18) — as it does with Autotask and Halo PSA — so you can keep your PSA for billing and run delivery in a purpose-built, dependency-aware tool.
The single most mature, purpose-built critical-path engine in the MSP space — a dedicated CPM engine with RPAX autonomous risk scoring, real-time re-forecasting and AI-guided remediation — plus native bi-directional connectors to three PSAs (ConnectWise, HaloPSA, Autotask) and strong review scores.
Where Current fits: Moovila's MSP-grade PSA sync sits in its higher/contact-priced tier (only the $11 Pro plan is publicly priced), it has no financially-isolated partner portal, and reviewers cite time-consuming setup and limited report export. Current pairs a native critical-path engine with a true partner portal, PTO-aware scheduling and transparent per-seat pricing in one platform.
Deep, native resource-capacity planning is its core product — a capacity-based calendar with live per-day overbooking bars and multi-year forward visibility, fed by real Outlook availability (PTO, holidays, meetings). Its capacity forecasting is genuinely more specialized than Current's.
Where Current fits: Proxuma is an Autotask-only planning overlay with no critical-path engine, no dependency-aware auto-scheduling, no client/partner portal, and opaque pricing. Current is a full delivery platform — critical path, dependency scheduling, partner isolation, PMI playbooks — and works in native mode or synced to any of three PSAs (Autotask, ConnectWise, or Halo PSA), not just Autotask.
A true all-in-one RMM + PSA + billing on one data model at transparent, predictable per-technician pricing with fast, low-effort onboarding — and it bundles native RMM (monitoring, scripting, patching, remote access), an entire capability domain Current doesn't provide.
Where Current fits: Syncro has no real project module — 'projects' are parent/child tickets, with no Gantt, no critical path, no task dependencies, no milestones and no portfolio view. For actual project delivery (the thing this category is about) Current is a different class of tool; the two solve different problems.
An all-inclusive single-price PSA where projects live natively next to billing, extreme configurability that bends to almost any workflow, very high user-satisfaction ratings (~4.8/5), a weekly release cadence, and native Gantt/Kanban/milestones with AI project-from-SOW.
Where Current fits: Halo has no native critical-path engine (it leans on the Moovila integration), a steep learning curve, and a required paid onboarding package — it's powerful but not turnkey. Current delivers native critical-path and a DB-isolated partner portal out of the box, adopts faster, and syncs to your PSA — Autotask, ConnectWise, or Halo PSA — for billing rather than asking you to migrate.
Why MSPs choose Current
- A modern 2026 ground-up rebuild (React 19 + Supabase), not a project module bolted onto a decades-old help-desk or PSA core — so the delivery experience is fast and purpose-built rather than layered onto legacy screens.
- A real, native critical-path engine plus dependency-aware scheduling and back-scheduling — native to the product, not a paid Moovila/TopLeft add-on the way it is for Autotask, ConnectWise and HaloPSA.
- PTO/availability-aware scheduling that runs consistently across the timeline, the dependency map AND what-if scenarios — availability-aware planning most incumbents only partially document.
- Kanban AND Gantt AND an interactive dependency map all native in one tool (Autotask lacks native project Kanban; Syncro lacks project boards entirely).
- A partner portal with genuine database-level financial isolation — Postgres RLS + partner-safe views + restrictive policies — so partners can never see financial data. Incumbent portals (Autotask, ConnectWise, Syncro, Halo) are designed to EXPOSE invoices to clients; Current is the opposite by construction.
- Flexible source-of-truth: 'autotask_synced' keeps Autotask as the billing record while Current owns scheduling, or 'current-native' where Current is the source of truth — plus shipped ConnectWise and Halo PSA integrations and Datto/Addigy/ScalePad connectors.
- Unified CRM + project delivery + PMI/post-merger-integration playbooks (24 managed-intelligence templates per tenant), so sales-to-delivery lives in one platform.
- Multi-tenant by design with Postgres RLS as the security source of truth and six roles plus super-admin — real tenant isolation, not UI-only gating.
- Transparent, low pricing ($50/user/month or $540/user/year) against the quote-based, contact-us pricing of Autotask, ConnectWise and Moovila's MSP tier.
- Built by an operating MSP (ITPartners+, Grand Rapids MI) for MSPs — the workflows reflect real MSP delivery rather than a generic PM tool.
The honest verdict
If your priority is a single system of record where projects, tickets, contracts and invoices all live in one place, the established PSAs earn their reputation: Autotask, ConnectWise, HaloPSA and Syncro are the billing source of truth with years of ecosystem, brand trust and breadth Current doesn't claim to match — and Current is not itself a billing system. If your priority is the deepest specialized scheduling, Moovila's critical-path engine and Proxuma's capacity planning are genuinely more mature in their narrow lanes. Current is younger, with a smaller install base, and it deliberately leans on your PSA for billing rather than replacing it. That's the honest tradeoff. But for the actual job of project delivery, Current brings together — natively, in a modern 2026 build, at a transparent $50/user — the things incumbents reach only through dated UIs, weeks of onboarding, or paid add-ons: a real critical-path engine, dependency-aware and PTO-aware scheduling, Kanban and Gantt and a dependency map, and a partner portal that hides financials at the database layer instead of exposing invoices. The most credible way to buy it is not 'rip out your PSA' but 'keep Autotask, ConnectWise, or Halo PSA for billing, and run delivery in Current' — you get modern, purpose-built project operations without giving up your system of record.
Sources
- 1.Autotask Projects (Datto/Kaseya Autotask PSA project module) — product & pricing documentation — ww1.autotask.net
- 2.ConnectWise PSA Projects (ConnectWise Manage) — product & pricing documentation — connectwise.com
- 3.Moovila (Moovila Perspective) — product & pricing documentation — moovila.com
- 4.Proxuma — product & pricing documentation — proxuma.io
- 5.Syncro (project management in the Syncro MSP platform) — product & pricing documentation — syncrosecure.com
- 6.HaloPSA Projects — product & pricing documentation — usehalo.com