We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) 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."
"I like the fact that it's easy to set up and learn our network. I've used some other systems where it takes a lot of time and effort to manage the monitoring system, so you get what you put into it. The nice thing about Auvik is that you put the credentials in, put the agent on the network, and it just does its thing. It sets up alerts that you would most likely turn on anyway without even having to do it. If you add another new device to the network, it detects it and sets alerts up for that device. With the other systems that I've used, I had to manually add those devices in and manually set the alerts for new devices. I like that it's an almost set-it-and-forget-it sort of system."
"Among the most valuable features are the hardware life cycle and configuration backups, when applicable... When it does show you the hardware life cycle for, say, a Cisco device and the configuration backup, that's the most useful aspect for me as a network engineer."
"The network mapping is an excellent feature, as each device is represented by a different shape or object, which is great for helping us, our staff in training, and our customers understand how the network is structured. Seeing the bigger picture helps immensely, as we provide remote support; we're not boots on the ground."
"The most valuable feature is device discovery through SNMP."
"In the past, I would manually input the credentials and IP address of a single device from my machine and access the device, which took a lot of time. A task that previously took 40-45 minutes can be completed in less than five minutes with Auvik. It reduces the time needed to check a device for a single company, so we can act quickly before a disaster happens."
"The ability to map out the network topology is one of the top features I like about Auvik. It's one of the best on the market. They have a feature called Loopback Detection, which has helped us, in many scenarios easily detect that without having to physically go to the location to see if there is a loopback somewhere."
"The network flow piece is the most useful. We can identify the busiest parts of the network based on the reporting from the switches about what is utilizing the most bandwidth on specific switch ports. I can narrow down which segments of the network might be having issues."
"Auvik's auto-detection feature is something I haven't seen in other monitoring systems. We can keep track of our internal device tables to map the devices on the network. The diagram saves us a lot of time. Usually, our new customers don't provide much information about their networks, so we need to spend a lot of time logging into every single device, going into the CDP and LLDP, making nodes, building diagrams, and adding more information. Auvik does it instantaneously."
"The solution is used for monitoring the hardware inventory. For instance, it helps with the whole operational monitoring view for the company's infrastructure."
"I like some of their newer features, such as maintenance schedules, because SCOM records SLA and SLO time."
"It takes a lot of the headache out of managing your data centers and software in other places."
"We have found the scalability capabilities to be okay."
"The solution has improved our overrides and the ability to start services if they're stopped."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring of Windows and Linux servers."
"This solution satisfies all of the requirements that we need for our Windows-based systems, so if you are using the Windows platform then this is an easy solution."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"When it comes to monitoring, Auvik provides a single integrated platform, but I feel it could do more things. If it could facilitate device upgrades, that would be great."
"I would relegate the network map to its area instead of being the focus of every page. The network map is in the front and center of the UI. I would rather have the option to look at it when I need it instead of having it on every single page. It's beautiful, but I don't need it on every page."
"The solution can improve by increasing the tech file management capability."
"Auvik could be more customizable. Also, the network map isn't as clear as it could be. I don't know if it's even possible, but it would be nice if Auvik could pick up on dumb switches. I don't know if that's possible based on SNMP, but if they can figure out a way to do that, it would make our life much easier."
"We have a few other networking tools. Some of them are specifically for managing Wi-Fi. They have some great features where they give specific recommendations based on the network traffic they're seeing and based on other customers that have had similar issues, or even just by looking at your own data that they're gathering. They give AI-based recommendations on how to improve the network. Auvik could have something like that. It gives us excellent visibility into the network, but if there is a way to include some remediation tips that are digestible by level-one and level-two techs, that would be great."
"It uses SNMP in its discovery process and how it pulls in data. But today it doesn't have an SNMP trap facility so you can't have your infrastructure devices push alerts into Auvik. And that for us would be a big feature that we would like to see."
"The use of a mobile app would be very beneficial because sometimes I cannot access a computer."
"The pricing model could also be improved, as the unlimited selection isn't unlimited. The billing work on the build devices and components, and I've tried to set up the solution in a few different configurations, resulting in multiple build devices each time. Therefore, I question the cost-effectiveness for a business of our size."
"It could use some system enhancements, such as better dashboards."
"All of the areas of reporting are very bad and need to be improved."
"Non Windows monitoring is fairly weak. Network device monitoring is not reliable."
"On-prem network monitoring is something that could be improved drastically."
"The solution’s initial setup is difficult."
"In a future release, they should add email notification alerts."
"Then there is also an issue with capacity and limited space. That is something that needs to be improved."
"The dashboard features are not user-friendly for our management team, only for the technical department."
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 SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while SCOM 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 SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix and Meraki Dashboard, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) 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.