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

BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 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

BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management
Ranking in Cloud Management
42nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.3
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (46th)
IBM Turbonomic
Ranking in Cloud Management
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
205
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (5th), Virtualization Management Tools (5th), IT Financial Management (1st), IT Operations Analytics (11th), Cloud Analytics (1st), Cloud Cost Management (1st), AIOps (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Cloud Management category, the mindshare of BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management is 1.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 4.1%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Turbonomic4.1%
BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management1.4%
Other94.5%
Cloud Management
 

Featured Reviews

VB
Enterprise Solution Architect at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Helps design blueprints in a cloud environment but the support is a major problem
One of the major problems is that support is not so good. I used to have a support expert in Spain but they left two years ago. BMC doesn't invest a lot in network automation but network automation is a major point in CLM. There aren't any experts here in Europe, maybe they have in America, I don't know. The main problem is the support in Europe. We had a lot of problems with the people who got put on our cases. The agents that we were assigned to were not so capable. They wanted to replicate the problem. If you have an incident, it takes a lot of time to troubleshoot the problem. The incident support is not so good. The technicians don't know the platform well. BMC doesn't want to invest in CLM. Two years ago we had a lot of problems. Maybe BMC realized that CLM is an end of life product.
reviewer1446966 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Engineer at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them
The management interface seems to be designed for high-resolution screens. Somebody with a smaller-resolution screen might not like the web interface. I run a 4K monitor on it, so everything fits on the screen. With a lower resolution like 1080, you need to scroll a lot. Everything is in smaller windows. It doesn't seem to be designed for smaller screens. When I change the resolution to 1080, I only see half of what I would on my big 4K monitor. It would be annoying to have to scroll to see the flow chart. They have a flow chart that goes top to bottom like a tree. On a lower resolution, it might be nice if that scrolls horizontally because it's long, narrow, and tall. It's only three icons wide, but it's 15 icons tall. I think it would be helpful to have the ability to change that for a smaller screen and customize the widget.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"By allowing end users to request their own services, the request process for systems is much quicker and more accurate."
"Integrates role-based access control with pre-configured policies for CIS, DISA, HIPAA, PCI, SOX, NIST, and SCAP documentation and remediation."
"You can tie together your public and private cloud infrastructure into a "single pane of glass"."
"CLM has a multi-cloud portal because they have the resources to implement in various environments in various ports."
"Assesses change impact or completes an audit using multiple dashboard views."
"Total build time has been reduced from four weeks to one week, then later to 24 hours."
"We have many regions where more than 10000 servers are deployed, so it helps in patching and hardening of servers."
"Allowing systems to be provisioned in a wide range of environments, such as Azure, AWS, or on-premise, reduces the level of training required as well as creates consistency across the board."
"If you need a product that can automate workload balancing, capacity planning, reporting of resource use - Turbonomic is a fantastic choice."
"Customer Service is excellent; I have yet to open a ticket and not have my problem looked at right away, and 99% of the time, the issues were resolved right away."
"It also has some very nice reporting tools built around virtual machines; it tells you how much storage, memory, or CPU is being used monthly, and then it gives you a very nice way to be able to send out billing structure to your end users who use servers within your environment."
"Turbonomic has provided us an automagic optimization of our environment from an operational point of view."
"I like Turbonomic's built-in reporting. It provides a ton of information out of the box, so I don't have to build panels for the monthly summaries and other reports I need to present to management. We get better performance and bottleneck reporting from this than we do from our older EMC software."
"Turbonomic is one of the best software solutions ever written."
"The automation piece is one of the most valuable features."
"Turbonomics ability to present suggested improvements, and enact those changes upon approval, have been very helpful in our environment."
 

Cons

"One of the major problems is that support is not so good."
"One of the major problems is that support is not so good."
"The installation and configuration can be tricky due to it being built on Remedy."
"Needs integrations with other providers to provide a custom public cloud environment."
"The installation and configuration can be tricky due to it being built on Remedy."
"It was complex as it does not include a good, extensive feasibility and compatibility guide."
"Going to BMC for PS is not at all recommended from my experience."
"Needs integrations with other providers to provide a custom public cloud environment."
"Since Turbonomic can do so much, it can be a complex system to look at for one that haven’t laid eyes on it before."
"Turbonomic doesn't do storage placement how I would prefer. We use multiple shared storage volumes on VMware, so I don't have one big disk. I have lots of disks that I can place VMs on, and that consumes IOPS from the disk subsystem. We were getting recommendations to provision a new volume."
"Alert emails could be more comprehensive."
"Initially the GUI was difficult to follow and find where things are. It's gotten better but the GUI could still use some work to make certain functions more obvious."
"They could add a few more reports. They could also be a bit more granular."
"There are charts and graphs in the dashboard that are confusing to read and understand."
"We don't use Turbonomic for FinOps and part of the reason is its cost reporting. The reporting could be much more robust and, if that were the case, I could pitch it for FinOps."
"More Azure features are needed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing and licensing are fair. We purchase based on benchmark pricing, which we have been able to get. There are no surprise charges nor hidden fees."
"The pricing is in line with the other solutions that we have. It's not a bargain software, nor is it overly expensive."
"It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."
"You should understand the cost of your physical servers and how much time and money you are spending year over year on expanding your virtual farm."
"I consider the pricing to be high."
"I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company before IBM's purchase, it was compatible with other tools."
"The product is fairly priced right now. Given its capabilities, it is excellently priced. We think that the product will become self-funding because we will be able to maximize our resources, which will help us from a capacity perspective. That should save us money in the long run."
"In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
885,728 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Insurance Company
10%
University
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise57
Large Enterprise147
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?
It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is set as a percentage of the consumption of some of our customers' services. The ...
What needs improvement with Turbonomic?
The implementation could be enhanced.
What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?
We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting. This helps us get a consolidated view of all customer spending into a single d...
 

Also Known As

BMC CLM
Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JDA Software, Morningstar, Orange Business Services, Wipro
IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,728 professionals have used our research since 2012.