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 Mar 8, 2026

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 (11th)
CA Unified Communications M...
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
65th
Average Rating
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Unified Communications Monitoring (3rd), Network Monitoring Software (87th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of BMC TrueSight is 1.1%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CA Unified Communications Monitor is 0.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
BMC TrueSight1.1%
CA Unified Communications Monitor0.6%
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…
reviewer1605927 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr.Solutions Engineer | Project Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Meets the needs of the customer but all of the features need improvement
I do not choose the solution. The client does. I am an implementer. We are systems integrators. It is worth mentioning that the solution should be easy to install and offer the user exhibition capabilities. Also, a data sheet should be used to gather information about the product, to facilitate easy and simple implementation. I rate CA Unified Communications Monitor as a five out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is stable, we have not needed to speak to the vendor regarding any issues, it has been operating very well."
"It is a stable solution."
"It has provided us with a single location to host all events to be viewed/monitored by our NOC. This has greatly helped them to streamline their processes."
"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."
"Valuable features include wide support for monitoring, strong event management, service management capability, baselining (analytics) and easy to integrate other tools with it."
"It is breadth. It covers so many different technologies which can roll up into a single console."
"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."
"Helix Innovation Studio is a very good feature. It allows us to develop our own enterprise applications and make them available for the customers."
"For us, it's very key to know the voice quality of the total solution, which is based on many components across many domains."
"We use the solution to meet the needs of the customer."
"We use the solution to meet the needs of the customer."
"Good end-to-end monitoring"
 

Cons

"The dashboard and performance graphs should include a way to automatically schedule and export reports."
"The knowledge modules could be more lightweight in size. At present, the installation packages can be quite large."
"I think the solution is overly complex and requires a lot of resources."
"BMC's solutions for cloud monitoring (monitoring of AWS and Azure resources) are very poor in stability and customization."
"There are some small limitations with this tool in terms of reporting dashboards that fit all of the requirements of the individual customer."
"I would really like to see out-of-the-box support for monitoring uninterruptible power supplies."
"Reporting would be an area for improvement in TrueSight."
"The knowledge modules could be more lightweight in size."
"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."
"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved."
"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."
"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved, specifically the user experience."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Other products are more expensive than BMC TrueSight."
"Pricing is all volume-driven. I think we were paying between $80 and $85 per license. That's per unit, for a perpetual license. You pay it one time and then, every year, you pay 20 percent of that for annual maintenance and support. But now that we've grown, we've purchased tens of thousands of licenses and the cost per license has gone down to something like less than $30..."
"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."
"Annual licensing amount depends on the customers requirements. Support is an additional fee and there are options for three and five year support."
"We pay license fees of between $150 and $200 per asset. There is an enterprise software license fee, and then you pay a percentage for your maintenance, and then Premier Support. For example, if you buy a two-year license for the product, then the maintenance fee is added to that for two years at X percent a year. Then there's a small fee on top of that for Premier Support..."
"The solution is based on endpoints and knowledge models which can be costly."
"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."
"Consider scalability very carefully: how much you want to monitor and what components are very important. Then, depending on these two things, filter out unwanted metrics or attributes. If you do a good job at filtering the data, then your licensing costs will be manageable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
885,264 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Government
6%
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: March 2026.
885,264 professionals have used our research since 2012.