No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CA Unified Communications Monitor vs Statseeker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 2024

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

CA Unified Communications M...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
89th
Average Rating
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Unified Communications Monitoring (3rd), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (60th)
Statseeker
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
76th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of CA Unified Communications Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Statseeker is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Statseeker0.5%
CA Unified Communications Monitor0.5%
Other99.0%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

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.
JE
Team Leader at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
We can set up a dashboard to monitor the status of an entire site, which provides more insight into any issues across devices
One engineer is enough for the solution's maintenance. There has been a significant improvement in Statseeker in the last few versions. It includes a wallet map and features we plan to implement when deploying the latest or penultimate versions across all our sites. This will significantly assist in identifying sites surpassing thresholds or KPIs, making issue detection much more accessible. The threshold feature is handy for identifying delays and major outages. This graphical map enables us to quickly assess the scope of nationwide problems, allowing for swift action and efficient reporting to management and service providers. This tool facilitates monitoring by visualizing all network elements with their respective coordinates, highlighting any downtimes or issues through color-coded green for operational, orange for approaching thresholds, yellow for minor alarms, and red for critical issues. The tool is a monitoring tool that helps in identifying problems. It is necessary to have someone trained to set up the dashboards because they might require some programming or specific configuration skills. Once it's configured, it works well. It's not as straightforward as other tools where you plug in the device, and everything works. With Statseeker, you still need to put in some effort to set up your dashboard properly. It requires someone with good training and proficiency in setting up these dashboards. They can benefit the technical and operations teams, providing useful insights into the network and the executive management team to receive reports on the overall network health. Overall, I rate the solution a seven 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

"We use the solution to meet the needs of the customer."
"Good end-to-end monitoring"
"We use the solution to meet the needs of the customer."
"For us, it's very key to know the voice quality of the total solution, which is based on many components across many domains."
"Network visibility is fantastic."
"Overall, Statseeker has reduced the complexity of our network monitoring once it's installed."
"I love the historical data and the fact that it doesn't average it when it saves it."
"This is a very cheap solution in order for us to accomplish what we needed to do in terms of providing visibility into the network."
"The product has improved our organization by simplifying monitoring and giving real-time alerts for issues we might not immediately be aware of otherwise."
"The Statseeker polling engine is very efficient and it does not miss any outage."
"The product does what we need it to do, and definitely gives us heads-up on results and issues we are having in a timely manner."
"If you need a product that's able to monitor all the ports in your environment or all the ports that you want, this is a great product to use."
 

Cons

"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."
"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved."
"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved, specifically the user experience."
"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."
"More private MIB object support, such as WAN optimisation performance and wireless, would be helpful."
"It would be very nice to have the Cisco ACI option included in the regular license."
"I would like to see the solution incorporate diagnosis of the workstation."
"It would be nice if they had twenty-four-hour technical support because we contact Australia and we have to wait for them to open."
"Maybe they could provide a little bit more flexibility on creating custom dashboards."
"The interface looks like a Windows 3.1 program. It needs a complete refresh."
"Detailed data can be hard to extract in CSV form. Sometimes, being able to dump down raw data would be good so various time periods across a longer period could be analysed. At present, data can be presented within Statseeker, but there is lots of "white space" between data points."
"This solution would be improved with better automatic discovery for ping-only devices."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"We paid $5,000 to $10,000 a year in maintenance."
"Up until we actually talked to Statseeker, and Statseeker came and gave us an enterprise licensing model for multiple accounts, I would have said the pricing was not good value. The fact they've come to the party now and given us a very good discount, I would say it's probably about right, the pricing they're giving us now. But the retail pricing, if I went out and, as a separate company, and asked for pricing for one account, I probably would say their retail pricing is not competitive. The fact that they've given us a discount now because we have multiple servers across multiple accounts, I would say that pricing is about right, but not their retail pricing. It's too expensive."
"Pricing is reasonable but licensing should unlimited."
"We pay somewhere between $5,000 and $8,000 yearly in licensing fees."
"One thing that needs improvement is how it's licensed. I understand historically the company licensed it off a same charge for everyone. I understand the company needs to make money, but how they introduced the tiered licensing model, and then multiple layers of licensing was a bit of an issue. So, on the whole, coming up with a licensing model that isn't confusing and complicated and is easy to understand would be one way to improve the product. They have told me lately that they're changing how they license stuff, but they haven't made that - as I understand it - in their marketing material public knowledge as of yet. I would say that at the moment it's a bit convoluted. It's confusing. Some of their basic licensing model is a bit of a ripoff. If you go over five or ten support calls in the basic licensing model they start charging you for support calls. I think that's a bit rich."
"We have permanent licenses so there's really no cost, other than ongoing maintenance. When I think about it, that's running us about $20,000 a year."
"We now feel the pricing is a good value. Previously we had a just a normal license but now we've got an Enterprise license. Since the Enterprise, it's been a lot better value. We did think it was pretty expensive before, but with the Enterprise license it's almost less than half that price. If you have a number of accounts within the organization that use Statseeker, I would suggest get the Enterprise license."
"It's probably $5K a year for the license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Marketing Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise34
 

Also Known As

CA UC Monitor
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BBVA Compass
With active deployments in over 22 countries and many Fortune 100 firms, Statseeker monitors millions of interfaces in real-time. Some example customers include: FedEx, Optus, Verizon, California State University, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Monash University, Texas A&M University.
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Statseeker and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.