We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Network Analytics and SCOM 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."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"It is a good application, providing for real-time monitoring of the organization of data. It can basically identify points of peak traffic where possible issues are being caused."
"Visibility. The ability to look East and West. To see what is passing through your circuits, where it is coming from, and how big it is."
"Stability is the most valuable feature we have seen in this solution."
"It provides good visibility to the customers. People are still evaluating it, but it provides visibility and helps them to take action to remediate and mitigate the issues that are highlighted on the dashboard. It has good integration with the Cisco switching platform."
"StealthWatch lets me see the ports running in and out and the country. It has excellent reporting, telemetry, and artificial intelligence features. With the telemetry, I can set thresholds to detect sudden changes and the alarms go through the PLC parts. I can see all the ports running on that trunk."
"Able to drill down into a center's utilization, then create reports based on it."
"Cisco Stealthwatch has predefined alerts for different types of security issues that might happen in the network. Whether it's PCs or servers that are used for botnets or Bitcoin mining we receive the alerts automatically. This functionality is what we receive from the solution out of the box."
"Another notable feature of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is its Layer 7 visibility, which allows us to monitor and analyze network communications at the application layer."
"The monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"This solution saves us a lot of work because it reduces the effort that is required in order to start monitoring."
"The solution is scalable. If you want to monitor more you have to buy more licenses, but you can add on. We don't plan to increase usage."
"Because it's Windows-based, it actually reports quite well. It reports everything you can think of on the Windows server and allows you to monitor anything. It's excellent for those in the Windows world as it's very good at it."
"The solution's reporting engine has given me detailed information on which applications or services I've either failed or about to fail in terms of the predictive makeup on Azure cloud."
"We are able to do problem determination on runaway processes."
"They have great integration with the active directory."
"The product’s auto-remediation feature helps with automation."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The initial setup is complex, as there is a lot to configure."
"It's not great as a standalone solution."
"Cisco Stealthwatch needs more integration with device discovery. We have to do a lot of hard work to figure out what things are. Better service integration is required."
"It is time-consuming to set it up and understand how the tool works."
"We would like the solution to make more advances in the way that Extreme Networks has been doing."
"I would like to see interoperability with other Cisco products because we have ThousandEyes, Cisco Prime, and others. The interaction among these is important to us."
"The ability to be natively integrated into Port Aggregator would be beneficial because it would reduce just one more component that's needed in order to have that type of view."
"The initial setup was straightforward but required a lot of data entry, to begin with building out the server types and network types."
"The solution should have more tools for monitoring the cloud engine versus on-premise."
"Then there is also an issue with capacity and limited space. That is something that needs to be improved."
"The GI is difficult to work with and the reporting servers are also difficult."
"In a future release, they should add email notification alerts."
"The interface is a little bit cumbersome and certain actions could be simplified."
"In terms of features that could be improved, I would say the agent integration into the operating system. We are having difficulties integrating Linux into some of the networking devices."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
"The solution should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Cisco Secure Network Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Network Analytics is ranked 24th in Network Monitoring Software with 58 reviews while SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews. Cisco Secure Network Analytics is rated 8.2, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Network Analytics writes "Increased the visibility of what is happening in our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". Cisco Secure Network Analytics is most compared with Darktrace, Cisco Secure Cloud Analytics, ThousandEyes, Vectra AI and Arista NDR, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics. See our Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs. SCOM 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.