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

BMC TrueSight vs OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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 Event Monitoring
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (30th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (24th), Cloud Monitoring Software (26th), AIOps (16th)
OPS/MVS Automation Intellig...
Ranking in Event Monitoring
10th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.3
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Mainframe Management (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Event Monitoring category, the mindshare of BMC TrueSight is 8.6%, up from 8.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence is 4.6%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Event Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
BMC TrueSight8.6%
OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence4.6%
Other86.8%
Event 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…
SR
System Programmer at Krungsri
Automation has improved alerts and file handling but script-based setup still needs simplification
OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is the automation tool I use. I think OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is good for creating complex rules because it's coding, but it takes time to learn how to use it. OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence works well if you know the syntax very well and you have experience in creating scripts or REXX syntax; it would be very good and is a good tool, but it takes time to learn, so that is for experienced staff to work with. I would rate the product a six from one to ten. I cannot think of any additional features in the next release of OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of BMC TrueSight Operations Management are the blackouts and event management."
"It has provided more value than we expected and it does what it says it's going to do."
"It allows our operations team to have one single application to reference when investigating issues in our environment."
"The event management part of TrueSight Operations Management, in my experience, is probably the best in the market."
"I believe that the ease of use and UI is great"
"It is a stable solution."
"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."
"The ability to pull hosts together to show what processes are running, so it can be used for change management."
"OPS/REXX is valuable because it allows us almost unlimited flexibility in automating our system."
"With the automation pieces we can bring this region up or take this region down, and it allows us to always meet our time critical requirements."
"Because we can define complex commands, the training of new operators is quicker. We can also put checks in place, that will prevent user errors."
"OPS/MVS is much more intuitive to use, especially compared to Netview/SA/GDPS."
"It's definitely a very stable product."
"The service has been wonderful."
"For what it was produced for, it's an excellent product; it's done everything that we wanted to do with the product and more, which has been a really big help for us."
"If something breaks and it goes down when it's not supposed to, automation brings it right back up."
 

Cons

"I think the solution is overly complex and requires a lot of resources."
"The solution's support service could be better."
"The dashboards could be better. The graphs are extremely limited."
"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."
"I would really like to see out-of-the-box support for monitoring uninterruptible power supplies."
"I would like to see a little more out-of-the-box event correlation and expanded AIOps type capabilities. Where you can train your artificial intelligence operations to be able to memorize an issue once you encounter one scenario, so if you encounter that same problem, you can get to the root cause very quickly."
"In our company, we faced some issues with the solution’s application endpoint, IP, and the physical location of the transactions."
"The sizing (which is difficult), the maintenance of it and the upgrade paths. This is a difficult area which is not easy to cover, as every client has a different approach of implementing the product."
"The new release addressed some shortcomings of the product."
"My impressions on OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is that it's quite difficult to use, as it relies mainly on the coding syntax and doesn't provide an easy-to-use GUI."
"One of the things we've been wanting to do is to be able to automate off of different highlighted messages without actually knowing what the message is."
"SSM - when OPSMVS is started, there is a choice of either assuming all microhooks are up or all are down and working from there. It would be better if there was a feature that could discover the true state of every microhook."
"Scalability is zero. It cannot be scaled because of its age."
"The interfaces to USS, CA UIM could be better. CA Common Services interfaces - namely Zdata Mover, Zmessage Service, Zdatacolletcor - are poorly documented."
"Because of its age, it's a little bit difficult to modernize some of the integrations and some of the functions."
"Some of the command sequences are too long."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Annual licensing amount depends on the customers requirements. Support is an additional fee and there are options for three and five year support."
"The solution is based on endpoints and knowledge models which can be costly."
"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 cost depends on the usage."
"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."
"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."
"Use conservative figures. In terms of hardware, monitored servers and also effort. The product is not cheap. But as with other products, you get what you pay for."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Event Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business25
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise24
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Large Enterprise25
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with BMC TrueSight Operations Management?
There are some complexities with deployment that could be improved in BMC TrueSight.
What is your primary use case for BMC TrueSight Operations Management?
I work with BMC TrueSight and have been using it for eight-plus years.
What needs improvement with OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence?
My impressions on OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is that it's quite difficult to use, as it relies mainly on the coding syntax and doesn't provide an easy-to-use GUI. OPS_MVS should have an easy-t...
What is your primary use case for OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence?
We use the auto-purge transaction for some transactions that run very long, and we also use automation to open and close files in CICS as well.
What advice do you have for others considering OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence?
OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is the automation tool I use. I think OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is good for creating complex rules because it's coding, but it takes time to learn how to use i...
 

Also Known As

ProactiveNet, TrueSight Operations Management
CA OPS MVS Event Management and Automation, CA OPS/MVS Event Management and Automation, Unicenter CA-OPS/MVS Event Management and Automation
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ensono, Transamerica, Boston Scientific, Park Place Technologies, inContact, TD Ameritrade, PNC Bank
Tieto
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC TrueSight vs. OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.