We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) and Azure Network Watcher based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"I like the way everything can be integrated. Auvik uses SMNP and various protocols to ensure we can monitor any device on the network."
"I like Auvik's SNMP capabilities. Seeing all the metrics and analytics in one dashboard is a game-changer. The topology is excellent."
"The fact that it provides a single, integrated platform for our organization is important as well. Having 50 different accounts to log into would make things difficult at times."
"Auvik's reliability is impressive."
"I like the information Auvik provides you about switches that helps you troubleshoot connectivity issues between clients and switches. It's much easier to locate where the problem is on the network. We were using N-central for our RMM. Unfortunately, that doesn't map out the switches. It tells us what is up or down but doesn't do a good job of network troubleshooting like Auvik does."
"I like the quick mapping. I can put a customer in, and I can put the Auvik monitor in, and then probably within about half an hour to an hour, I can see most of the map."
"The network mapping, the logical layout, is the part that I love the most, showing what switch is connected to what switch. I couldn't live without it. That is the big selling point for me."
"It's hard to say that one feature is my favorite, but I like Auvik's ability to map networks using SNMP. It maps the network, so I can look at all the devices and set them to provide alerts or automatically create tickets when outages occur. If clients need it, I can export all of the data into an Excel spreadsheet."
"The most valuable features I have found are typology, visualization, and capture."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Network Watcher is using the gateways with the connections. The monitoring is useful for the logs and application insights into the data. The traffic filtering issues when it comes to deploying those applications are helpful."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is good for monitoring device behavior."
"I like the visibility."
"It provides good visibility."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Network Watcher is the cloud-native application firewall. It is helpful for securing databases."
"What I like most about Azure Network Watcher is that it's focused more on the architecture. I also like that it has a packet capture feature that tells you how the packet travels and whether it's exiting Azure, etc."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Auvik's notifications could be better."
"The only area that I dislike about the solution is the lack of exportability."
"The user interface could be a little bit faster, and there should be a legend in the map."
"I would like to see some recommendations in terms of steps that could be taken to assess the alerts. A platform that I have used is Darktrace, which does security testing, and it let us know what was going on, what may have caused it, and what could be done... if Auvik could recommend common ways to go about doing what needs to be done to resolve an alert, that would be helpful."
"I would like to be able to get a little bit more granularity in turning on and off alerts because I get flooded with alerts. It gives too much information at times."
"When we deal with larger networks, the current interface is difficult to navigate around the network map because of the volume of devices."
"Auvik's network map, while helpful, could benefit from improved clarity."
"The Auvik interface, while functional, doesn't feel as intuitive as some competing products."
"Azure Network Watcher could improve by having other built-in applications. For example, an application to log activities for in and outbound traffic."
"Azure is good, however, the Fortinet GUI is more intuitive and I like it more than anything else."
"Azure Network Watcher needs to have better documentation and it needs to capture information accurately."
"Lacks sufficient security features."
"The solution could improve by limiting the need to clarify the logs. When the clarification is minimized, it is better for everyone involved."
"The initial setup and initial learning curve could be improved to be easier."
"I would like to see in the future if we can troubleshoot as a firewall because it is equipment as a network player and some diagnostics."
"The initial setup and deployment could be improved to be simplified."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Monitoring Software with 139 reviews while Azure Network Watcher is ranked 34th in Network Monitoring Software with 9 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while Azure Network Watcher is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Auvik Network Management (ANM) writes "Enables us to get on top of issues before they become an outage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Azure Network Watcher writes "Helpful database security, good support, and beneficial cloud-native application firewall". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix and Domotz, whereas Azure Network Watcher is most compared with Microsoft Network Monitor, Nmap, PRTG Network Monitor, ThousandEyes and SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Azure Network Watcher report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.