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

Planview Portfolios vs UNICOM System Architect comparison

 

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

Planview Portfolios
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Project Portfolio Management (4th)
UNICOM System Architect
Ranking in Enterprise Architecture Management
22nd
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Enterprise Architecture Management category, the mindshare of Planview Portfolios is 2.9%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UNICOM System Architect is 1.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Architecture Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Planview Portfolios2.9%
UNICOM System Architect1.6%
Other95.5%
Enterprise Architecture Management
 

Featured Reviews

Monabi Kingsley - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at 3M
Centralized planning has improved resource visibility and supports data‑driven financial decisions
The best features Planview Portfolios offers are visibility enhancement, robust system performance, and comprehensive resource management. This enhanced visibility in Planview Portfolios ensures that all users can easily track progress, identify bottlenecks, and make informed decisions to optimize workflow efficiency. When discussing robust system performance, the system's robust performance in meeting our various work requirements effectively and efficiently stands out. It is very stable and reliable, contributing to a seamless user experience, which enables users to focus on their tasks without disruptions. I also love the financial breakdown, planning and prioritization, and attribute collection on projects in Planview Portfolios. Planview Portfolios has positively impacted my organization since I started using it. It has enabled me to gain insights into the full scope of work consuming resources. I am able to know where the resources are being consumed more, especially which resources are consuming the most. I have been able to leverage resources management and resource time reporting, which enabled the generation of $90 million in annual revenue through labor billing to customers.
reviewer1261290 - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at a government with 10,001+ employees
Useful for creating build-outs and architecture views, but requires a publisher add-on for some detailed reports
I don't use the tool or know a lot. It is going to have some shortcomings. When it comes down to publishing, we just found out this week that they actually have a publisher add-on. So, what we were trying to publish was not giving a detailed report about the architecture, views, etc. I just wish they had sent these to UNICOM and contacted them about add-on features for the publishing part of the tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution view into resource capacity and availability helps us to manage work."
"Whenever we have issues, there is always someone ready to help us. Their people are knowledgeable and responsive. They get to tickets quickly. Just three or four weeks ago, we were having issues with getting data into Planview. We submitted a ticket and the turnaround was probably 45 minutes to get a response."
"The biggest impact of using Planview in our company is visibility to everything that is being worked on."
"I would suggest you go with this product, instead of using other tools."
"Planview Portfolios has increased our ability to monitor and guide processes, process health, and compliance automatically without manual intervention."
"Planview has helped connect funding and strategic outcomes with work execution. That is the key use that we have for it. We use it to validate the work that we're doing and the funding that we need. The difference between the previous version and current version for us would be the ICPM and the way it gives us different scenarios. We can go in and build that out."
"The resource capacity and availability have helped us to manage work by preventing us from starting work that we cannot consume."
"Planview has helped connect funding and strategic outcomes with work execution because we utilize the strategic module within Enterprise One to help with that work."
"It is useful for creating build-outs and architecture views and for publishing reports and stuff like that for different programs."
"It has good end-to-end metamodel interrelationships."
 

Cons

"I think some of the administrative aspects of it could be a little easier, especially when it comes to designing reports. The reporting coming out of it could be a little bit better."
"Some of the out-of-the-box reporting is not immediately useful and although it can be configured or customized, there are still improvements that can be made."
"The licensing part is a bit costly in comparison with the other available PPM tools."
"I would like to be able to integrate with Oracle to supplement what we're currently doing with reporting."
"Its support to legacy paying customers is something PlanView is not handling well.​ We were unable to implement due to lack of professional support by PlanView. ​"
"The financial piece of the tool could be better. While it may have to do with the complexity of the work that we do, it seems that the tool should be able to drill down a bit deeper into the financial area."
"Because in the beginning, it was so overwhelming, and we didn't know anything about the tool."
"It is not an end-user-friendly product, and that's really the biggest thing."
"UNICOM System Architect is quite a dated tool. The usability needs to be improved."
"They need to add reports that show the enterprise architecture perspectives, and the dashboards should be comfortable for the senior enterprise architects so that they can view the complete landscape."
"I don't use the tool or know a lot. It is going to have some shortcomings. When it comes down to publishing, we just found out this week that they actually have a publisher add-on. So, what we were trying to publish was not giving a detailed report about the architecture, views, etc. I just wish they had sent these to UNICOM and contacted them about add-on features for the publishing part of the tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have several hundred licenses. It costs us several hundred thousand dollars a year."
"In the time that I've used it, we've doubled up the amount of dollars on our intended projects."
"Planview is a little pricey. From a licensing perspective, for just a simple timesheet user who does nothing in the system but reports time, the licensing is a little pricey, but you have to look at it from what it is that you get. We have 6,000 users, and I don't manage the system at all. I just have to do add them to the system. The servers, maintenance, OS levels, security patching for the OS, and all other things are not something that we maintain. So, you have to look at it from an operational perspective. It is not just the product itself. A holistic view has to be taken when you look at the product and how you're going to support it. I would have to hire an entire operation staff to bring it in-house, and at the end of the day, that might cost me more."
"The licensing part is a bit costly in comparison with the other available PPM tools."
"I don't think we have necessarily purchased everything that I would have liked to have seen."
"When we went through that process, I believe it is competitive with others on the market. However, there are less expensive options available. It's a more premium offering at a higher price."
"I think all in we are at $33,000 a year and that includes Projectplace and Planview. We used to have the integration to JIRA, but we don't pay for that anymore."
"We have unlimited licenses for all of our functionalities. Since we went global, we went with that model."
"I don't remember the price. It is a different cost for just buying it, and then you have a maintenance cost, which you need to renew every year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Architecture Management solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise66
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Planview Portfolios?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been that Planview Portfolios is one of the best and a very cost-effective tool.
What needs improvement with Planview Portfolios?
Planview Portfolios can be improved as the user interface defaults to the last opened portfolio, which can waste a lot of time loading a large portfolio if that is not what I need at that moment. J...
What is your primary use case for Planview Portfolios?
My main use case for Planview Portfolios is to ensure governance and decision auditability by incorporating embedded workflows, approval management, and key document retention supporting a single c...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Planview Enterprise One, Troux
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

UPS, NatWest, Ingram Micro, Canadian Tire, Viessmann, Volvo, NASCO, UNESCO
Apple, Facebook, Google, HSBC, PayPal
Find out what your peers are saying about Planview Portfolios vs. UNICOM System Architect and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.