Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BMC TrueSight vs CA Unified Communications Monitor comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 7, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

BMC TrueSight
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
31st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (28th), Event Monitoring (8th), Cloud Monitoring Software (25th), AIOps (5th)
CA Unified Communications M...
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
69th
Average Rating
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Unified Communications Monitoring (3rd), Network Monitoring Software (88th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of BMC TrueSight is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CA Unified Communications Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BMC TrueSight1.2%
CA Unified Communications Monitor0.5%
Other98.3%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

NikhilKalwint - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Specialist at ServiceIO
Has improved monitoring efficiency and supports fast issue resolution through responsive support and reliable automation
I work with BMC TrueSight and have been using it for eight-plus years BMC TrueSight brought a positive impact and benefits to our organization. The customization part is one of the advantages of the product, along with the monitoring capabilities. Automated root cause analysis and predictive…
itarchit489981 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Architect at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Good end-to-end voice quality monitoring and offers valuable features
The solution should have automatic baseline detection. On the per hour, per base, per week. That's usually the best. And on a per individual CI level. I know that they're working on it and when that's available then we will definitely implement it because it will reduce the effort we need to maintain all the products. Right now we have to set thresholds for every location, and it needs to be actually dynamic so if we have better thresholding, we'll have faster alarms across all our locations. We won't have to expend effort on it by resetting or checking them on a regular basis.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Its event management capabilities are very open and flexible. I haven't seen a use case scenario with a customer that we couldn't actually solve the problem for, so it's really good. There are some interesting things that happen in an enterprise network (things that people don't normally expect), and the event management product is very flexible. You can solve problems as far as your imagination can go with it."
"Using the TrueSight platform we can monitor server performance and notify the customers using the integrated ticketing for events. We can let them know if there are any issues with a server, or application, or database."
"The fact that they have a very integrated relationship with Sentry Software, the Knowledge Module, is valuable... The richest feature for us is the number of Knowledge Modules that we can load into the product to add breadth of service to the customer. It enables us to move up the operational stack from hardware, to operating system, to application, and to cloud... That enables us to provide one pane of glass over all those layers - hardware, OS, app, and cloud."
"The tool is flexible enough to be customized based on customer requirements."
"I believe that the ease of use and UI is great"
"Signature baselines, which have allowed us to fine tune many of our events and significantly reduce the number of events generated."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most beneficial part of the product in terms of IT monitoring revolves around the areas involving automation, and it also serves as an end-to-end event management and incident management tool."
"Good end-to-end monitoring"
"We use the solution to meet the needs of the customer."
 

Cons

"The solution is overly complex."
"The dashboards are not good. We have a limited dashboard, and if we want better dashboards, we need to use other solutions like Grafana because the TrueSight dashboards are not good."
"Application performance management (APM) is an area with certain shortcomings in the solution that needs improvement. I"
"I would really like to see out-of-the-box support for monitoring uninterruptible power supplies."
"The knowledge modules could be more lightweight in size. At present, the installation packages can be quite large."
"Cost is an issue with BMC TrueSight Operations Management."
"One of the things that the TrueSight environment is missing is some of the HA abilities. The data collection server called the ISM doesn't really have the HA functionality or workload balancing. It was missing from the previous product as well. It's missing redundancy."
"More modules for less popular applications and better documentation."
"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."
"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"BMC TrueSight Operations Management is not on the cheaper side, but its pricing is on a case by case basis. Its licensing model is simple and based on the number of devices."
"The only possible additional cost that I can mention, that you might not be aware of, is that it uses Oracle partitioning, if you use Oracle. There are Oracle partitioning fees that go with that."
"The tool is moderately expensive."
"It is a large, complex product. So, there is a commitment of manpower to deploy it, as it is not a cheap product."
"Though I have no clue about the tool's actual price, I know that it is astronomical."
"We're end-of-lifeing it now. Overall, the licensing costs of BMC are a challenge for us in that they're hard costs, whereas open-source monitoring has soft costs, where it's harder to line-item."
"The solution is based on endpoints and knowledge models which can be costly."
"The solutions are not the cheapest but are robust and stable. License model is rather complex and BMC do often change the model."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
880,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Government
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise24
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BMC TrueSight Operations Management?
The solution provides visibility to our infrastructure, how it is, the resources we are monitoring, and quick updates when it has any problems. We have integrated it with ServiceNow to open instances.
What needs improvement with BMC TrueSight Operations Management?
There are some complexities with deployment that could be improved in BMC TrueSight.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

ProactiveNet, TrueSight Operations Management
CA UC Monitor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ensono, Transamerica, Boston Scientific, Park Place Technologies, inContact, TD Ameritrade, PNC Bank
BBVA Compass
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC TrueSight vs. CA Unified Communications Monitor and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
880,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.