Commissioned Research
Top 10 Best Building Management System Software of 2026

GITNUXSOFTWARE REVIEW

Facilities Property Services

Top 10 Best Building Management System Software of 2026

Top 10 ranked building management system software tools with vendor coverage and key tradeoffs, aimed at facility and engineering teams.

19 min readUpdated Editorially scoped research
How we ranked these tools
01Editorial Scope

Vendors set the topic, but our editors set the inclusion criteria and the evaluation framework before research starts.

02Source Research

Search agents gather the source set and the review record, including transcriptions of video reviews and podcasts.

Read our full methodology →

Framework: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%

Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy

Building management system software coordinates HVAC, energy, and facility workflows through automation logic, data models, and integration interfaces. This ranked list targets analysts and technical operators who need verifiable tradeoffs across integrations, RBAC, audit logging, and configuration governance, rather than feature checklists or vendor claims.

Honeywell Optimizer is the right enterprise fit if you need governed energy optimization cycles tied to occupancy and operations monitoring, while Delta Controls enteliWEB suits teams that want operator-first alarms, trends, and graphics with BACnet interoperability without custom gateway work.

Editor’s top 3 picks

Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.

Editor pick
1

Honeywell Optimizer

Closed-loop optimization workflows that connect supervisory schedules and analytics to actionable control changes through governed configuration.

Best for: Fits when portfolios require governed energy optimization cycles tied to occupancy and operations monitoring.

2

Johnson Controls Metasys

Editor pick

Metasys supervisory head-end workflows coordinate alarms, schedules, and trends using configurable graphics bound to real points.

Best for: Fits when portfolios need one supervisory layer for HVAC monitoring, scheduling, and alarm management with BACnet devices.

3

Delta Controls enteliWEB

Editor pick

enteliWEB graphics and alarm views are built around operational workflows from commissioning through ongoing fault handling.

Best for: Fits when teams need operator workflows and BACnet interoperability without custom gateway development.

Comparison Table

1
enterprise
9.3/10
Overall
2
9.0/10
Overall
3
vertical specialist
8.7/10
Overall
4
8.4/10
Overall
5
vertical specialist
8.1/10
Overall
6
7.8/10
Overall
7
7.5/10
Overall
8
vertical specialist
7.2/10
Overall
9
enterprise
6.9/10
Overall
10
API-first
6.6/10
Overall
#1

Honeywell Optimizer

enterprise

Cloud-connected building management software for comfort, operations, and energy performance.

9.3/10
Overall
Features9.2/10
Ease of Use9.3/10
Value9.4/10
Standout feature

Closed-loop optimization workflows that connect supervisory schedules and analytics to actionable control changes through governed configuration.

Honeywell Optimizer is deployed as a supervisory control layer that consumes building data, applies rule and optimization logic, and pushes coordinated setpoint and scheduling changes back into the control environment. Honeywell Optimizer’s integration depth is strongest when building controls and data sources are already aligned to Honeywell ecosystems, which reduces translation work for tags, points, and control sequences. The tool also provides day-to-day operational surfaces such as dashboards for trends and alarms, which supports operations staff in monitoring control outcomes.

A key tradeoff is that extensive cross-vendor field integration and complex control mapping can become integration-heavy when the building data model and point naming conventions do not match the Honeywell control data model. Honeywell Optimizer fits best for organizations that need recurring optimization cycles tied to occupancy and energy targets and want governance over configuration changes with clear audit traces. It is a strong choice for portfolio rollouts where central configuration standards and repeatable operational workflows matter more than one-off automation experiments.

Pros
  • +Tight loop between optimization logic and supervisory scheduling workflows
  • +Operational visibility with trends and alarm-centric monitoring views
  • +Governed configuration workflow with auditability for multi-site change control
  • +Integration focus that reduces friction with Honeywell controls
Cons
  • –Cross-vendor point mapping can require significant upfront integration work
  • –Optimization configuration needs careful tuning to avoid control instability
  • –Reporting customization can be slower than spreadsheet-first workflows
  • –Role and permission management requires disciplined site onboarding
Use scenarios
  • Energy management engineers

    Run recurring optimization cycles

    Lower energy use with controlled setpoints

  • Facilities operations teams

    Triage alarms with operational context

    Faster fault isolation and recovery

Show 1 more scenario
  • Multi-site systems integrators

    Standardize supervisory configuration

    Consistent deployments and safer changes

    Integrators apply controlled configuration patterns across sites with audit visibility.

Best for: Fits when portfolios require governed energy optimization cycles tied to occupancy and operations monitoring.

#2

Johnson Controls Metasys

enterprise

Building automation software for HVAC control, equipment monitoring, alarms, and energy management.

9.0/10
Overall
Features9.0/10
Ease of Use9.2/10
Value8.8/10
Standout feature

Metasys supervisory head-end workflows coordinate alarms, schedules, and trends using configurable graphics bound to real points.

Metasys is typically selected when a campus or multi-building portfolio needs one supervisory workflow with consistent alarm handling, data logging, and operator presentation across sites. The common operational workflow is device discovery, point configuration in the supervisory layer, then binding those points to trends, alarms, and recurring schedules for control actions. Integration depth is strongest for HVAC control and site systems that already follow BACnet-compatible patterns and the Johnson Controls field controller approach. Operator experience is anchored in configurable workstations and graphics that connect supervisory data to day-to-day monitoring.

A key tradeoff is that deeper customization and non-standard integrations require disciplined configuration work and, in some deployments, additional connectivity components. Metasys fits best when a facility team needs a centrally managed supervisory workflow that supports alarm management and historical trend logging without replacing existing field devices.

Pros
  • +Strong supervisory workflows for alarms, schedules, and trend logs across multiple buildings
  • +BACnet-oriented interoperability for common building device integration patterns
  • +Mature Johnson Controls controller ecosystem for HVAC-centric deployments
  • +Role-based access controls paired with operational audit visibility
Cons
  • –Non-standard system integrations can require extra configuration work and connectivity components
  • –Porting complex custom logic between sites takes careful point mapping discipline
  • –Graphics and point configuration can become labor-intensive for large point volumes
Use scenarios
  • Facilities engineering teams

    Daily monitoring with consistent alarm handling

    Faster incident triage

  • Systems integrators

    Campus integration across BACnet points

    Repeatable site commissioning

Show 1 more scenario
  • Multi-site operations managers

    Portfolio scheduling and reporting

    Consistent operating conditions

    Supervisory schedules apply standardized occupancy control patterns while trend history supports reporting.

Best for: Fits when portfolios need one supervisory layer for HVAC monitoring, scheduling, and alarm management with BACnet devices.

#3

Delta Controls enteliWEB

vertical specialist

Web-based building management software for controls, alarms, trends, graphics, and analytics.

8.7/10
Overall
Features8.7/10
Ease of Use8.6/10
Value8.8/10
Standout feature

enteliWEB graphics and alarm views are built around operational workflows from commissioning through ongoing fault handling.

enteliWEB is positioned as the supervisory control layer for distributed building automation deployments, with operator-facing monitoring through graphics, floor plans, and configurable alarm views. It supports common BAS connectivity patterns like BACnet/IP and uses polling and event-driven updates to populate points, trends, and status. Scheduling and occupancy control live in the head-end, so control intent can be centralized while field controllers handle local execution. Alarm management and trend logging support long-running operational review for faults, performance shifts, and maintenance planning.

A practical tradeoff is that broad third-party integration requires careful points mapping and driver coverage during commissioning, which can extend project configuration time. It fits best when Delta controls controllers or gateways are already part of the building architecture, because point naming, data quality expectations, and control handoffs are easier to standardize. It is also a strong fit for organizations that need consistent operator interfaces across multiple sites and want one operational workflow for alarms, trends, and schedules.

Pros
  • +Centralized alarm management with operator-oriented views for daily control
  • +Configurable schedules and occupancy logic at the head-end layer
  • +BACnet/IP connectivity supports multi-vendor point discovery
  • +Trend logs support ongoing review of performance and fault patterns
Cons
  • –Third-party device integration can require time-heavy point mapping
  • –Automation depth depends on controller capabilities and integration drivers
  • –Multi-site governance needs disciplined naming standards during commissioning
Use scenarios
  • Facilities operations teams

    Run daily alarm response

    Faster troubleshooting during incidents

  • Building automation engineers

    Commission HVAC and utility points

    Reduced integration rework

Show 2 more scenarios
  • Energy and performance analysts

    Review long-term trend history

    More actionable maintenance signals

    Trend logs support recurring analysis of performance drift and fault correlations.

  • Portfolio IT and controls governance

    Standardize operator interfaces across sites

    Lower training variance

    Shared head-end workflow patterns help operators handle alarms and schedules consistently.

Best for: Fits when teams need operator workflows and BACnet interoperability without custom gateway development.

#4

Siemens Desigo CC

enterprise

Integrated building management software for HVAC, fire safety, security, and energy systems.

8.4/10
Overall
Features8.5/10
Ease of Use8.1/10
Value8.6/10
Standout feature

Centralized supervisory workflows that coordinate alarms, trends, and operator actions across the Desigo ecosystem.

Siemens Desigo CC is a building management system focused on distributed control and supervisory operations across large HVAC and building subsystems. It supports engineering of control logic, alarm and trend management, and operator workflows tied to site-wide graphics and schedules.

Pros
  • +Strong engineering workflow for supervisory control, alarms, and operator graphics
  • +BACnet integration for building controllers and field device connectivity
  • +Consistent alarm and trend handling for day to day operations
  • +Extensibility via integration interfaces for plant data and system events
Cons
  • –Heavier project governance than smaller BMS deployments
  • –Advanced configuration requires disciplined standards for tag management
  • –Integration work can be project-specific when mapping external data models
  • –Role and permission setup adds overhead in multi-team operations

Best for: Fits when engineering teams need supervisory control across many zones with long-lived BAS integrations.

#5

Distech Controls EC-Net

vertical specialist

Building automation platform for HVAC control, system integration, graphics, and analytics.

8.1/10
Overall
Features7.9/10
Ease of Use8.1/10
Value8.3/10
Standout feature

EC-Net’s supervisory workflow ties operator graphics, alarms, and historical trends into a single monitoring model for Distech-controlled buildings.

Distech Controls EC-Net manages BAS supervision tasks like alarm handling, trending, scheduling, and operator graphics in a centralized head-end workflow. It connects to building devices through Distech control ecosystems and standard field links used in building networks.

Pros
  • +Centralized operator graphics with alarms, trends, and schedules for day-to-day control
  • +Integration paths tailored to Distech control environments for faster commissioning cycles
  • +Event visibility supports operations workflows with consistent point and equipment context
  • +Supports multi-system supervision needs across HVAC and related building functions
Cons
  • –Non-Distech field integration can require project-specific adapters and engineering
  • –Automation depth depends on how control logic is partitioned between controllers and head-end
  • –Large installations can demand structured naming and commissioning governance to avoid confusion
  • –Extensibility for custom integrations typically relies on vendor-supported mechanisms

Best for: Fits when Distech-centered BAS projects need centralized supervision, alarm workflows, and consistent operator views across sites.

#6

KMC TotalControl

SMB

Cloud-hosted building management software for HVAC monitoring, scheduling, alarms, and energy data.

7.8/10
Overall
Features7.7/10
Ease of Use8.0/10
Value7.7/10
Standout feature

KMC controller-oriented supervisory logic that links schedules, overrides, and alarms to engineered point objects.

KMC TotalControl is a building management system software used with KMC building controllers to run supervisory control, scheduling, and trend-based monitoring. It supports centralized graphics and alarm handling tied to field and controller points, with engineering workflows focused on point definitions, schedules, and setpoint logic.

Pros
  • +Tight alignment with KMC controllers for point mapping and control handoff
  • +Centralized graphics, alarms, and trends for day-to-day operations
  • +Sequence logic supports HVAC scheduling and status-driven control behaviors
  • +Operational visibility through event histories tied to field point changes
Cons
  • –Integration breadth beyond KMC ecosystems is narrower than multi-vendor suites
  • –Higher governance effort is required to keep point databases consistent
  • –Advanced analytics often depend on add-on workflows rather than built-in FDD
  • –Throughput and responsiveness can depend on server sizing and object counts

Best for: Fits when facilities teams standardize on KMC controllers and want tight supervisory control with strong operational monitoring.

#7

Tridium Niagara

API-first

Open framework for connecting, supervising, and analyzing building automation systems.

7.5/10
Overall
Features7.9/10
Ease of Use7.2/10
Value7.2/10
Standout feature

Niagara Framework object and module architecture for reuse across BAS projects and long-lived installations

Tridium Niagara brings an automation platform approach, with Niagara Framework components used to build and maintain BAS supervisory workflows. Its strengths center on integration to multiple building protocols, plus application extensibility through component-based engineering.

Pros
  • +Extensible Niagara Framework lets teams standardize objects across portfolios
  • +Strong protocol integration options for BACnet and common field interfaces
  • +Configurable alarm and trend logging tied to managed device objects
  • +Reusable application components reduce duplication across projects
Cons
  • –Engineering discipline is required to keep configurations maintainable
  • –Advanced automation often depends on installed modules and integrator know-how
  • –UI customization and governance can require significant ongoing effort
  • –Performance tuning is needed for high-volume trend and alarm workloads

Best for: Fits when enterprises need configurable supervisory automation with deep integration across many buildings.

#8

Automated Logic WebCTRL

vertical specialist

Web-based building automation software for HVAC control, alarms, scheduling, and analytics.

7.2/10
Overall
Features7.4/10
Ease of Use7.2/10
Value6.9/10
Standout feature

WebCTRL alarm and control workflows that coordinate operator response, point states, and configurable logic in one supervisory environment.

Automated Logic WebCTRL is a BMS and BAS supervisory software family used to manage HVAC and other building systems through head-end workstation workflows. It supports points, alarms, trends, and graphics for common operational tasks like scheduling, setpoint change control, and fault response routing.

Pros
  • +Strong BACnet interoperability between supervisory workstation and building field controllers
  • +Mature alarm and trend workflows for operations, including recurring log views
  • +Configurable automation logic tied to points, schedules, and operator actions
  • +Extensible integrations through certified connectivity options used by systems integrators
Cons
  • –Building-specific configuration effort can be high for large point counts
  • –Advanced automation often relies on integrator-led templates and standard practices
  • –Graphics and control policies can become difficult to govern across many sites
  • –Subsystem coverage depends on installed drivers and integration add-ons

Best for: Fits when organizations need head-end orchestration with BACnet-based controller integration and mature ops tooling.

#9

Spacewell

enterprise

Connected workplace and building operations software for facilities, energy, and occupancy data.

6.9/10
Overall
Features6.6/10
Ease of Use7.0/10
Value7.1/10
Standout feature

Integration and automation via a connectivity and API layer used to connect supervisory screens to external systems.

Spacewell delivers building automation system integration and supervisory control for multi-site portfolios. It focuses on data collection from heterogeneous building controllers, then turns that data into dashboards, alarms, and operator workflows for HVAC and related subsystems.

Pros
  • +Integration-focused architecture supports linking controllers from multiple building vendors
  • +Alarm and event handling supports operator workflows with actionable context
  • +Reporting and trends provide a practical path from field data to management visibility
  • +API-first integration supports automation and system-to-system connectivity
Cons
  • –Porting integrations across sites can require disciplined controller mapping and testing
  • –Advanced automation workflows can depend on configuration depth rather than simple toggles

Best for: Fits when portfolio teams need a supervision layer that standardizes alarms and reporting across mixed controller fleets.

#10

Facilio

API-first

Cloud facilities operations software connecting building systems, maintenance, energy, and workflows.

6.6/10
Overall
Features6.4/10
Ease of Use6.8/10
Value6.6/10
Standout feature

Alarm and work-order workflow management tied to monitored asset points and operational approvals.

Facilio is a building management system approach aimed at coordinating facilities operations workflows with monitored building assets and controller integrations. Core capabilities focus on asset and space management, alarm and ticket workflows, schedules and setpoint changes, and centralized monitoring for HVAC-related points.

Pros
  • +Strong workflow routing for alarms into maintenance tasks and approvals
  • +Centralized view of building assets, spaces, and monitored points
  • +Configurable schedules and operational triggers for HVAC-related actions
  • +Auditable change history for administrative updates
Cons
  • –BAS integration coverage varies by controller and driver selection
  • –Automation rules are less granular than custom head-end logic
  • –Role separation is limited for complex multi-team administration
  • –Operational dashboards can lag on large multi-site point counts

Best for: Fits when facilities teams need alarm-to-work-order automation with monitored points, not deep controller programming.

Conclusion

After evaluating 10 building management system software, Honeywell Optimizer stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.

Our Top Pick
Honeywell Optimizer

Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.

How to Choose the Right Building Management System Software

We separate options by how they handle integration and control depth once you connect real building data. Focus on the API surface and admin governance controls so automation behaves the way your team expects.

Automation API surface depth

Why it matters

Automation and API surface depth decide whether schedules, reports, and provisioning run through code or stay trapped in the UI. With deeper surfaces, we can extend workflows without brittle manual steps.

How to check

On a demo, ask to create a task that changes a schedule and then pulls an updated status report via the API, not the browser UI. Request an example request/response for at least one automation action and one readback, and verify it includes identifiers you can map to your sites.

Building data model and schema clarity

Why it matters

A clear data model and schema reduce guesswork when assets, meters, and points grow over time. We need consistent attributes so trends, alerts, and automation stay aligned.

How to check

Ask what objects represent spaces, equipment, and points, then request a sample export or documentation snippet showing those relationships. In the demo, map two real points to dashboard widgets and confirm the same fields appear in logs and reports.

Provisioning workflow for points

Why it matters

Provisioning for points determines how quickly teams onboard new meters and controllers without breaking existing naming and history. Better workflows reduce configuration drift across buildings.

How to check

Request a walkthrough for adding one new sensor: point definition, naming, permissions, and where its data starts showing in trends. See whether you can import from a template file and whether the system validates required fields.

RBAC and audit log coverage

Why it matters

RBAC and audit log coverage matters when multiple teams configure automation and when changes must be traceable. Without it, we lose accountability for schedule edits and data mapping updates.

How to check

In the demo, create at least two roles and perform a schedule change as each role. Confirm the audit log records who changed what, when, and from which workspace or process.

Change control for automation configs

Why it matters

Change control for automation configs determines whether teams can roll back a bad update and avoid silent overwrites. We also care that upgrades don’t wipe custom automation rules.

How to check

Ask how configuration versions are stored and how you roll back one change. Then test: modify one automation rule, verify the difference in behavior, and confirm the system flags the updated version in history or logs.

Trend history fidelity and retention

Why it matters

Trend history fidelity and retention affects diagnostics, compliance reporting, and performance reviews. If downsampling happens without transparency, our decisions get skewed.

How to check

Pick one metric (temperature or power) and view it across multiple timescales in the demo. Ask what resolution changes over time, how retention is configured, and whether exported reports match what the UI shows.

Red flags

  • API actions work only via UI clicks, with no usable endpoints for reads or automation
  • Point naming or data fields change between views, exports, and logs
  • Audit logs omit the actor or the exact configuration change details

Fit by situation

  • If we need automation triggered by our own workflows, prioritize Automation API surface depth.
  • If our building portfolio keeps expanding with new points and assets, prioritize Building data model and schema clarity.
  • If multiple teams change schedules and mappings, prioritize RBAC and audit log coverage.

Frequently Asked Questions About Building Management System Software

How do Siemens Desigo CC, Johnson Controls Metasys, and Tridium Niagara differ in supervisory control design?
Siemens Desigo CC emphasizes distributed control coordination and supervisory workflows centered on engineered alarms and trends. Johnson Controls Metasys centers on the Metasys SCT head-end supervision layer that binds scheduling, alarms, and trend logs to configurable graphics for operator use. Tridium Niagara uses Niagara Framework components, where object and module architecture enables reusable supervisory automation across BAS deployments.
Which products provide integration paths that support automation workflows through APIs?
Spacewell includes an API surface used to connect supervisory screens to external systems and automate portfolio workflows. Facilio uses onboarding-selected metering and BAS connectivity options to support asset-centered automation and operational actions across sites. Honeywell Optimizer supports Honeywell-centric integration paths that link analytics and optimization routines into governed supervisory workflows.
How should data migration be planned when moving existing field points and logs into a new BMS?
Metasys and Siemens Desigo CC both rely on point definitions that bind devices to supervisory objects, so migration needs a point-by-point data model mapping before operators can see alarms and trend logs reliably. KMC TotalControl similarly requires engineered point objects to connect schedules, overrides, and alarm handling to KMC controllers. Niagara Framework projects often require rebuilding reusable objects for recurring alarming, scheduling, and trend logging based on the existing protocol mapping.
When do RBAC and audit logs matter more in a building management system?
Honeywell Optimizer emphasizes role-based access and audit visibility for controlled configuration in multi-site deployments. Distech Controls EC-Net and KMC TotalControl focus on governance for multi-zone operations where alarm and event visibility must stay consistent across operators and administrators. Metasys supports account roles and system audit trails for facility oversight in multi-user environments.
Where does Fault Detection and Diagnostics work differ between Honeywell Optimizer and general supervisory alarm workflows?
Honeywell Optimizer links analytics with scheduling and supervisory routines to support closed-loop tuning across HVAC and related loads. Automated Logic WebCTRL and Metasys coordinate alarm handling and operator response through configurable logic and alarm workflows tied to controller points. In those systems, FDD-style outcomes depend on what the analytics layer produces versus what the supervisory layer routes and displays.
What breaks if device integration drivers are missing or incomplete during commissioning?
Delta Controls enteliWEB depends on project-level driver support for each target device family, so missing drivers lead to gaps in BACnet integrations and recurring alarm or trend workflows. Automated Logic WebCTRL and Distech EC-Net rely on BACnet-based interoperability or Distech control ecosystems, so unsupported device families limit point discovery and operator visibility. Siemens Desigo CC uses BACnet connectivity plus project-level patterns for third-party data, so incomplete connectivity can break event propagation into supervisory views.
How do alarm management workflows differ between Spacewell, WebCTRL, and Facilio?
Spacewell turns collected controller data into dashboards, alarms, and operator workflows for portfolio reporting across mixed fleets. Automated Logic WebCTRL coordinates operator response by tying point states, alarms, and configurable logic into head-end workstation workflows. Facilio routes monitored asset point changes into alarm and work-order workflows with operational approvals rather than deep controller-level programming.
When does head-end workstation operation matter more than deep controller programming?
Automated Logic WebCTRL and Siemens Desigo CC center operator workflows on centralized head-end visualization for alarms, trends, and schedule control. Facilio focuses on operational actions, schedules, and setpoint change approvals driven by monitored points, which reduces the need for controller-level programming during ongoing operations. KMC TotalControl is more controller-oriented, where supervisory logic is tied to engineered KMC controller point objects and schedule or setpoint behavior.
What tradeoff comes with using Niagara Framework compared with single-vendor ecosystems like Honeywell or Johnson Controls?
Niagara Framework provides component-based extensibility for BAS supervisory automation, which increases configuration work when standard objects and services must align to site-specific standards and protocol mappings. Honeywell Optimizer and Metasys reduce cross-vendor engineering effort by following their respective integration ecosystems, but that coupling can limit how quickly non-native controller behaviors fit the supervisory data model. Spacewell reduces dependence on a single controller stack by using an integration-first connectivity model, which shifts effort into connectivity configuration and API-driven linking.

Tools reviewed

Primary sources checked during evaluation.

Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.

Commissioned Research

Funding and competing interests

This study was co-funded by several of the vendors assessed in it. No single vendor funded it. Funders could propose the market studied.

They had no role in selecting vendors, setting or weighting criteria, analysing data or drawing conclusions, and they received the same factual-accuracy check as every other vendor assessed.

Market definition, inclusion rules and criteria weights were fixed by an editor before research began and did not change afterwards. Editorial process →

Keep exploring

FOR SOFTWARE VENDORS

Not on this list? Let’s fix that.

Our best-of pages are how many teams discover and compare tools in this space. If you think your product belongs in this lineup, we’d like to hear from you—we’ll walk you through fit and what an editorial entry looks like.

Apply for a Listing

WHAT THIS INCLUDES

  • Where buyers compare

    Readers come to these pages to shortlist software—your product shows up in that moment, not in a random sidebar.

  • Editorial write-up

    We describe your product in our own words and check the facts before anything goes live.

  • On-page brand presence

    You appear in the roundup the same way as other tools we cover: name, positioning, and a clear next step for readers who want to learn more.

  • Kept up to date

    We refresh lists on a regular rhythm so the category page stays useful as products and pricing change.