Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs Kaseya Traverse comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Juniper Logo
416 views|304 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Auvik Logo
7,227 views|1,618 comparisons
99% willing to recommend
Kaseya Logo
603 views|353 comparisons
83% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) and Kaseya Traverse 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Kaseya Traverse Report (Updated: May 2024).
770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."

More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pros →

"The most valuable features of Auvik are the alerting and monitoring. Those functions mean it easily more than pays for itself. I have it integrated with Slack with multiple channels set up for our IT office. When just about any part goes down that I have assigned in the alerting portion, it will let the right people know within minutes.""My favorite feature so far is the alerts section. We've got our main company at the top, and then all of our customers are underneath that. We can either filter by a single customer or one of their sites specifically, or look at it from the top down and see the whole picture. It's an easy way for me to be able to have a high-level overview. I can see the status of all of our sites simultaneously without having to really dig in and get super granular, unless I want to.""The stand-out feature is the automated config backup on networking devices. This automation is handy in a bind when a machine crashes, and you need to pull the config out of Auvik.""I like Auvik's SNMP capabilities. Seeing all the metrics and analytics in one dashboard is a game-changer. The topology is excellent.""It's incredibly important, given our work as a managed service provider, to have a single pane of glass environment. That is very crucial to being able to identify and diagnose issues with a network and fix them promptly. We don't have to log in to 15 different devices to track down how things are connected.""The quick alerts in the event the equipment goes up or down is the most valuable feature.""I love the alerting. With a single pane of glass, it's able to tell me that there's a firewall error, or that something is offline, there is a switch configuration error, or a configuration change has taken place on a certain device.""The most valuable features include the inventory management and alerting capabilities."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pros →

"It's a simple and humble tool.""We have found the solution to be very flexible to our requirements. We have been able to configure it on-premise effectively when we were using less of the cloud.""The remote support and data collection features are great.""Most of the features are pretty good and the solution is user friendly.""Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap.""It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution.""Kaseya Traverse is a very stable solution and very sustainable in terms of what the market wants, what is out there, price-wise and functionality features. They're quite competitive and they are always innovating."

More Kaseya Traverse Pros →

Cons
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."

More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Cons →

"I would like to see improvement in terms of its integration with other applications and systems. I know that they are adding new systems. However, there is still work to be done there, such as integration with MS Teams. That is not working great for us.""Auvik's notifications could be better.""The deployment could be better. It's something that we've done recently. Auvik uses something called a collector, and I added a collector to our main site. I only added it to the main site, but when it came to adding additional sites because this was in the testing phase, I had to reconfigure that collector. It wasn't overly clear about how to do that and how to share. They call it sharing a collector. I had to mess around a bit to reconfigure that collector and add some new sites.""Currently, with Auvik's support, I'm troubleshooting some of the information gathered on Cisco devices through SNMP V3. Auvik is not able to pull some of the important information that it uses to draw the map, which is kind of shocking because it is Auvik. So, it is their platform, and it is monitoring Cisco devices, which are obviously very prevalent in the world. Auvik is having a hard time gathering such important information over SNMP V3, which is a networking standard, and on super popular device brand and model. They're actively working with me on that piece. It seems that network device management using SNMP V3 could use a little tuning.""The biggest area for improvement is the speed of the website because it's not something we host. Each of our clients hosts an agent that gathers the logs and pushes it up. The website can be slow to click around in or click through.""When mapping complex network architectures or nonstandard things, the map doesn't always accurately reflect reality. Sometimes the interface is pretty sluggish. It's much worse if the customer environment is relatively large and complex. But even if you split a site that's large into a couple of multi-sites, The performance is still a bit slow sometimes.""Onboarding devices could be easier. When you first add a device to the Auvik platform, you need to add each one by hand. It would be nice if they could automate the process where we only need to run a script.""Sometimes it's a little bit slow to load, but I can't think of anything else that could be improved."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Cons →

"Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also.""In terms of what could be improved, we are innovating all the time, as well as having a look at different avenues so that the strategy follows the structure. I think the software is still a little bit too new to actually fully asses what it has.""Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect.""The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently.""Reporting is a bit difficult.""Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us.""We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product."

More Kaseya Traverse Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "Compared to other products, Auvik's pricing is more feasible since you get all its features. You pay for licenses on a per network device basis. It monitors hypervisors, but does not bill for that. There are no additional costs, which is something that I like."
  • "The pricing is fair for the value and time saved that you get out of it. The larger you go, the more sense it makes per device, because as you hit different pricing tiers, it becomes much more affordable per device."
  • "Its pricing is a little on the high end. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. It is more expensive than other solutions, but their per-device model is very fair. Anything other than the networking gear is monitored by Auvik at no charge."
  • "The value is there. It's not that expensive per device and it's licensed per device. Unlike some of the other tools that I use, it's not real expensive. It's a good value for the price."
  • "It's great for small businesses, but when you start reviewing the pricing model, depending on how many devices, and what sub-devices you decide to pull in, it can get tricky as far as the pricing goes."
  • "As an individual IP company, Auvik is a little bit pricey. It is a little expensive, but as an MSP owner, I have a small side business. So, I'm an Auvik customer in that sense too. In that, I think it's reasonable to pay $10 to $15 a device or less depending on the endpoint. For the amount of capability that it has, it is very reasonably priced."
  • "Its pricing is very reasonable. We had looked at other solutions where you pay based on the amount of traffic that was filtered through and analyzed. With Auvik, we pay by a billable device. We're not paying based on every single device we have. For one of the locations I have, one network element would likely be a billable device. So, every billable device has a network element, but not every network element is a billable device. If I have a location that has 50 network elements, then maybe 30 of them are billable devices. PCs, VoIP phones, and access points are monitored at no charge."
  • "The cost for all the devices that we were billed at in my last job was about $2500 annually. It wasn't much. It has the most reasonable pricing as compared to any product out there. I can't complain. It is amazing. It allows me to bundle inside the package what I charge customers per user per month. I don't charge them per device anymore. That's not how we do things in the industry. It is per user per month. The way Auvik is charging us allows me to do it. For example, if they charge $250 for a certain number of seats, I'm just going to write the costs onto per user per month. I have a few leftover licenses to use, which allows me to go out and make some more sales and give some freebies at some shows. So, it makes me very flexible. I am very happy with it. It is billed by network devices. You could choose which billable device you want. What is really nice is that if you don't want one switch to be billable and the other one to be billable, you can do that. You just won't have the features that the billable switch has, which isn't horrible. Sometimes, you don't need that. What I'm really happy about is that Auvik doesn't force things on you and doesn't say, "You have to have all of this," and that's a great business model."
  • More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The price depends on whether you are monitoring different applications, especially in bulk, and depends on what you're doing. If you're monitoring one endpoint, it will cost you 150 ZAR."
  • "The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive."
  • More Kaseya Traverse Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
    770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points.
    Top Answer:The product is not expensive. I rate the product’s pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
    Top Answer:The Wi-Fi side needs improvement. In most warehouse environments, there are shortfalls in such conditions. We often face… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature of Auvik is its ability to drill down and identify unusual activity on the network, such as… more »
    Top Answer:While Auvik's pricing was attractive, we ultimately had to make budget cuts. After evaluating our various solutions… more »
    Top Answer:One drawback I found with Auvik was its inability to generate clear network diagrams. The connection lines appeared… more »
    Top Answer:The remote support and data collection features are great.
    Top Answer:The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive. We pay an annual license fee. There are no additional fees… more »
    Top Answer:Reporting is a bit difficult. It’s very cumbersome to set up new reports.
    Comparisons
    Learn More
    Overview

    Juniper Mist Premium Analytics is a comprehensive network analytics solution that provides organizations with valuable insights into their network performance and user experience. The primary use case of this product is to enable IT teams to proactively monitor, troubleshoot, and optimize their network infrastructure.

    The most valuable functionality of Juniper Mist Premium Analytics is its AI-driven insights and recommendations. Leveraging machine learning algorithms, it analyzes vast amounts of network data to identify anomalies, predict potential issues, and suggest remediation actions. This proactive approach helps organizations minimize network downtime, improve user experience, and optimize network performance.

    By providing real-time visibility into network performance, Juniper Mist Premium Analytics helps organizations quickly identify and resolve network issues. It offers detailed analytics on network traffic, application performance, and user behavior, allowing IT teams to pinpoint the root cause of problems and take immediate action. This not only reduces troubleshooting time but also enhances overall network reliability.

    Furthermore, Juniper Mist Premium Analytics enables organizations to optimize their network infrastructure. It provides insights into network capacity utilization, application usage patterns, and user behavior, allowing IT teams to make informed decisions about network design, resource allocation, and capacity planning. This helps organizations to ensure that their network is efficiently utilized and can support the growing demands of their users.

    Auvik is a network management software that provides real-time visibility and control over network infrastructure. 

    It automates network mapping, monitoring, and troubleshooting, allowing IT teams to easily identify and resolve issues. 

    With its intuitive interface and powerful features, Auvik helps businesses optimize their network performance and ensure smooth operations.

    Immediately identify impacted IT services using insights based on rich data analytics of events such as SNMP traps, Windows events and Syslogs. Resolve faults quickly via NetFlow enabled root cause analysis across cloud, on-premise, hybrid cloud and virtualized IT environments.

    Sample Customers
    Information Not Available
    UltiSat, Clear Concepts, nVidia, United States Postal Service, Cisco, Redbox, Spark Digital, People's Bank & Trust
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Government8%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company35%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    Retailer7%
    Government6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Construction Company12%
    Educational Organization8%
    Government7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company33%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government8%
    Retailer8%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise63%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business72%
    Midsize Enterprise17%
    Large Enterprise11%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business44%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise44%
    REVIEWERS
    Large Enterprise100%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business51%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise33%
    Buyer's Guide
    Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Kaseya Traverse
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Kaseya Traverse and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Monitoring Software with 133 reviews while Kaseya Traverse is ranked 67th in Network Monitoring Software with 7 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while Kaseya Traverse is rated 6.6. 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 Kaseya Traverse writes "A stable network monitoring tool requiring an easy initial setup phase". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Meraki Dashboard and Fortinet FortiManager, whereas Kaseya Traverse is most compared with LogicMonitor and PRTG Network Monitor. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Kaseya Traverse report.

    See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best Cloud 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.