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

DX Unified Infrastructure Management vs Kaseya Traverse 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

DX Unified Infrastructure M...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
55th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
29th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
120
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (20th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (36th), AIOps (23rd)
Kaseya Traverse
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
77th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
52nd
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of DX Unified Infrastructure Management is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaseya Traverse is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
DX Unified Infrastructure Management1.1%
Kaseya Traverse0.6%
Other98.3%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

ON
Solution Architect at SA Consulting
Helps us provide visibility into network performance, capacity planning, and cost analysis
Better support and more accessible resources are crucial. Customers have expressed that support is not as flexible, and it is difficult to obtain necessary information quickly. Customers would benefit from improved training material for integration with other products. The solution's pricing is high and needs to be reconsidered, and the technical support should improve to provide more accessible and open information.
AMMAR HUMAIDY HUSIN - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Consultant at a university with 11-50 employees
Automation increases efficiency, but pricing needs to be more competitive
Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpful for me as a customer. The issue always is the price, as we cannot beat most of our competitors on pricing alone. If a product is just nice to have, not essential like an antivirus, if it's not really competitive with pricing, we cannot sell it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The benefit is easy installation. Thus, the model approach of the product and out-of-the-box probes, which deliver direct value."
"One of the most valuable features would be the out-of-the-box capability; it's extremely capable from day one, not a lot of customization is required in order to implement it within your environment, and I think that's just a huge resource win from a time-measurement perspective."
"CA UIM comes out on top very often as it excels in all four of the above criteria, and is also easy to deploy and comparably simple to operate."
"Support has been very responsive to our requests."
"It is the foundation for our monitoring solution."
"For the past year, the tool has been quite stable in our environment, so I enjoy working with it."
"Any time we call up support, if the issue isn't resolved that day, I'm surprised."
"The technical support is very good, as we work closely with a dedicated project manager from CA who provides weekly status checks, troubleshooting, and responds to tickets fairly quickly."
"It's a simple and humble tool."
"Kaseya Traverse is a very stable solution and very sustainable in terms of what the market wants, what is out there, price-wise and functionality features. They're quite competitive and they are always innovating."
"It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution."
"Automating processes is crucial for me, so the automation part stands out."
"In terms of most valuable features, we are happy with everything so far, and maybe in a year's time I'll have a different opinion on what can change, what can be better, but for now it's the perfect solution."
"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."
"We have found the solution to be very flexible to our requirements. We have been able to configure it on-premise effectively when we were using less of the cloud."
"The remote support and data collection features are great."
 

Cons

"Continuing to mature the SNP collector and the network side of the tools they're still not as strong as they need to be."
"The UIM product is playing catch-up. They are not there yet to do a lot of the next-level things that we need them to do."
"Currently lacks a mobile application which would be helpful."
"Making a GUI with criteria such as selection by robot/hub/probe etc."
"Our experience has been that UIM does not do discovery well."
"It needs a little bit more functionality in the Admin Console."
"Web GUI (WASP) should be further developed as in some cases it has issues and instabilities."
"The main complaint with the tool is we are attempting to migrate off of SCOM and the management packs that SCOM has for Exchange (ED and SharePoint) it does not look like UIM and can't necessarily compete with those."
"With my most recent experiences on the solution, I can say that it isn't currently stable; there are a lot of glitches and bugs and the reliability just isn't there right now."
"We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product."
"The support for the solution needs some improvement. In my experience, the response time to answer a query is slow."
"Reporting is a bit difficult."
"Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect."
"Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us."
"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."
"I think the software is still a little bit too new to actually fully assess what it has."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product-price ratio is better than other brands such as Fortinet or SonicWall."
"Reasonable setup cost and licensing prices."
"CAD $400,000 annually."
"The license cost depends on the number of probes and robots."
"This product is expensive compared to other vendors (SolarWinds, ManageEngine)."
"Pricing for DX Unified Infrastructure Management isn't cheap at all. It's a complex tool, so you have to pay more. No one is happy with a large bill to pay, but if it's a complex product and you designed a complex solution to be monitored, it'll be your fault that you need to buy an expensive product, and that would be implicit in the design of DX Unified Infrastructure Management. Monitoring is just a small part of it. Sometimes you have to pay a significant amount of money for a complex yet very good solution."
"The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive."
"The price depends on whether you are monitoring different applications, especially in bulk, and depends on what you're doing. If you're monitoring one endpoint, it will cost you 150 ZAR."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Government
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise80
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for DX Infrastructure Manager?
We are an integrating company that offers DX Unified Infrastructure Management to customers. We help them set it up, do the integration, and provide support. Our end customers include financial ins...
What advice do you have for others considering DX Infrastructure Manager?
I would recommend DX Unified Infrastructure Management to others as it is a good and reliable solution. I would rate it nine out of ten due to its robust functionality and capability to support inf...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for DX Infrastructure Manager?
The pricing of DX Unified Infrastructure Management is high and often a concern for customers. The cost is higher compared to other Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), which is feedback we hav...
What needs improvement with Kaseya Traverse?
Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpfu...
What is your primary use case for Kaseya Traverse?
If I want to automate the management and maintenance of my server automatically, this product is a good use case for that.
What advice do you have for others considering Kaseya Traverse?
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. As Kaseya sellers, we always promote Kaseya first. If the price is more competitive, then I think it will be better. It's a main pain point for us as a resel...
 

Also Known As

DX Infrastructure Manager, DX Infrastructure Manager for Z Systems and CA UIM for zSystems, CA UIM (DX Infrastructure Manager), CA Nimsoft Monitor, CA UIM, DX Infrastructure Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBNCloud, IIJ Global Singapore, AT&S, AXSOS, Aozora Bank, HCL Technologies, IntelliNet, Securex
UltiSat, Clear Concepts, nVidia, United States Postal Service, Cisco, Redbox, Spark Digital, People's Bank & Trust
Find out what your peers are saying about DX Unified Infrastructure Management vs. Kaseya Traverse and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.