We performed a comparison between CA Asset Portfolio Management and ServiceNow based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about ServiceNow, BMC, Freshworks and others in IT Asset Management."Reduces software cost. Reduces the risk of software audits."
"You build the items one time and then you have your discovery that's coming in and the system will let you know whether or not you're out of compliance."
"Enables me to know where an asset is at any point during its lifecycle: How old it is, who it belongs to, and where it's at within that lifecycle."
"You could also look for software that is no longer being used and you can re-deploy the software, so then you save from a purchasing standpoint because you don't have to buy the software again."
"My organization now understands what type of products they have: warranties, how long the warranties last, depreciation. We never really knew what our depreciation values were, so it was really nice to have that on hand as well. It gives us a better view of our hardware, which is really beneficial."
"The most valuable feature of CA Asset Portfolio Management is the full integration with our Service Desk. It allows us to work both sides of life cycle management."
"They're staying up to date as vendors make changes to how they want to manage the software. CA is usually really quick about getting those updates in the system."
"It's easy to integrate with our system information."
"The Workflow feature is the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility of development for customization."
"It has more extensive features as compared to the other competitors."
"Everything about the schema, including the design of ServiceNow, is great."
"I have found the workflows and integration the most valuable in this solution."
"A workflow automation platform that's reliable, performs well, and has good reporting and integration."
"We can keep track of incidences. There is a bucket where we keep all our information, and it enables communication between stakeholders. It helps us collaborate with each other."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the possibility of the application development cap so that we can digitize workflows."
"It needs stronger rebooting components and the ability to develop our own software metrics."
"I would like to see more control over audit trail features, where you can turn on and off fields."
"There were a lot of things that we had to prepare for that we weren't thinking about with this installation. I think from a CA standpoint, the software was good. But us preparing for that, we had a lot more work to do."
"Needs a stronger reporting component, and more integration with CA Client Automation."
"I'd like to see more mobile. I'd like to have it actually manage mobile devices. It really doesn't, and I'd like to have a mobile application just for asset management."
"Keeping the catalog updated and having more titles in the catalog is helpful, because the more items that are in the catalog, your process goes faster because you don't have to manually build all the entitlements."
"CA SAM is not a CA product. The vendor is Aspera and CA is the distributor, so support is difficult. It's more difficult to get a good response."
"I'd like to see end-of-life information on software products."
"There is a need to enhance ticket details visibility on the portal, such as displaying SLA information, which currently requires development effort."
"ServiceNow doesn't cater to the Middle Eastern market."
"The reporting, which also includes dashboards, needs to be improved, and there should also be the ability to turn on and off portions of Project Management. Currently, as soon as you install the new version, you've got to go back there and make all the tweaks. There should be just a configuration file that goes to the new version. The Project Management module does not leverage the knowledge base the way it should, and there is no built-in ability to get to the articles. Resource management should be easier. It would be amazing if they can make resource management a little bit more graphical. There are other solutions that I've seen where resource management was a more visual experience."
"The asset management application could be improved. They have a lot of the infrastructure built, but it does not come with already made compatibility with some of the most popular vendors, such as Cisco and Microsoft. You have to fix it yourself."
"For healthcare, which is a pretty audited environment, there are no concrete solutions for digital signatures, apart from our license with Adobe, so it requires orchestration."
"They can maybe improve the area of agile project management. They do have user storyboards and other things, but we kind of lean on Jira for that work. This is perhaps an area that could be looked at a little more."
"The standard UI is very restricted. It doesn't look as good, compared to Remedy. Building your own UI requires some additional coding..."
"The RPA needs improvement. That's a new area for them that they're just entering into now."
CA Asset Portfolio Management is ranked 13th in IT Asset Management with 14 reviews while ServiceNow is ranked 1st in IT Asset Management with 211 reviews. CA Asset Portfolio Management is rated 8.4, while ServiceNow is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CA Asset Portfolio Management writes "We have a better view of our hardware, warranties, depreciation; but needs a mobile component". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow writes "A stable and scalable solution that has excellent features and is useful for collecting data and building KPIs". CA Asset Portfolio Management is most compared with , whereas ServiceNow is most compared with BMC Helix ITSM, Microsoft Power Apps, Pega BPM, IBM Maximo and Appian.
See our list of best IT Asset Management vendors.
We monitor all IT Asset Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.