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

CA Unified Communications Monitor vs NinjaOne comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
86th
Average Rating
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Unified Communications Monitoring (3rd), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (63rd)
NinjaOne
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
12th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Help Desk Software (8th), Server Monitoring (2nd), IT Service Management (ITSM) (8th), Remote Access (8th), Vulnerability Management (21st), Mobile Device Management (MDM) (4th), IT Alerting and Incident Management (7th), Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) (1st), Patch Management (4th), MSP Backup (1st), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (3rd), Autonomous Endpoint Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of CA Unified Communications Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NinjaOne is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
NinjaOne1.0%
CA Unified Communications Monitor0.5%
Other98.5%
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.
Not Joseph Pearson - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Vice President, Tech Solutions at LPL Financials
Has simplified remote software delivery and script management but needs improved reporting flexibility and better Mac support
NinjaOne's best features include ease of use regarding enablement and deployment, a broad selection and ability of software enablement, and API deliveries. Using CrowdStrike, we are able to tie in NinjaOne's API to have these automatically deliver to endpoints upon addition of those devices to a group with that policy deployed to it. NinjaOne has positively impacted our organization by making delivery easier for our end users and improving the ability to create scripts, manage scripts, and check status of devices and their compliance. This easier delivery with NinjaOne gives us oversight on devices without having to be on the call or remoted in directly to a device.

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."
"For us, it's very key to know the voice quality of the total solution, which is based on many components across many domains."
"Good end-to-end monitoring"
"NinjaOne allows even small teams of three users to support over 400 desktops and keep them up to date and working at peak performance."
"The solution's most valuable feature is related to its remote access...I know that NinjaOne's technical support is good."
"The customer support at NinjaOne is excellent, rated ten out of ten."
"The tool's most valuable feature is third-party application updates."
"If you are new to the MSP space and need an easy-to-set-up that can grow with your business and licensing, NinjaOne is an excellent option."
"The policies are probably the most valuable features. They're similar in function to Microsoft group policies where we can have it monitor certain things or push out software on a schedule. I would rate the policies eight out of 10. They're robust, I could monitor most of the things that Windows Performance Monitoring keeps tabs on."
"Since NinjaOne was implemented, I would say it represents a huge positive change."
"The biggest thing for me is having monitoring, remote access, patch management, and software deployment all in one place, which simplifies managing my client endpoints and saves me a lot of manual effort."
 

Cons

"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."
"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved, specifically the user experience."
"The remote connectivity could be better. It works most of the time, but sometimes, there are issues."
"One challenge I face with NinjaOne is that when remoting in, sometimes the end user has a resolution with very tiny text, making it necessary to zoom in to see what the other computer is displaying."
"The graphical user interface could be improved."
"There was a lot of delay with NinjaOne's ticketing system. For example, when a user creates a ticket and raises an issue, it would take 30 to 40 minutes to appear on the IT side. So the time delay issue is the main point."
"Maximizing the screen during an SSH connection is not possible, which hampers usability on Linux servers."
"I wish that they integrated it with more antivirus solutions. Currently, they only push Defender, but it doesn't really have integration with SentinelOne."
"It can have more integrations with third-party providers, such as Deep Instinct. They do partner with certain antivirus or remote access tool partners, but they can increase their portfolio to have more choices."
"The ticketing system in NinjaOne is not the best."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"NinjaOne is a little expensive but is still cheaper than competitors like Acronis or Veeam."
"I rate the solution’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is the lowest and ten is the most expensive."
"We currently pay $1.20 per device on a monthly basis."
"The pricing is reasonable and cheaper than ConnectWise."
"NinjaRMM uses a subscription model."
"NinjaOne's price is fine since my workplace is an educational institution, so we get the product at a really good price considering that we do not pay taxes, making the prices very fair and worth the product."
"Its pricing is great."
"We got a pretty good deal. It was fairly affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
22%
Comms Service Provider
19%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NinjaOne?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that I think it is very reasonable for the product that we get.
What needs improvement with NinjaOne?
To improve NinjaOne, there should be better integration between multiple different software including Cisco and Meraki.
What is your primary use case for NinjaOne?
My main use case for NinjaOne is managing machines over multiple networks and locations. For managing machines across those networks or locations, we have NinjaOne deployed on all our machines, and...
 

Also Known As

CA UC Monitor
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BBVA Compass
Status Pros, Mitchell and Company
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. NinjaOne and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.