Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs VMware Aria Operations for Applications comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) and VMware Aria Operations for Applications based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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. VMware Aria Operations for Applications Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 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
"Auvik has alerts that help you be proactive by telling you when something is behaving abnormally.""Shadow IT monitoring is huge for us since so many of our customers are highly regulated.""I like Auvik's mapping. Your home dashboard has a map view where you can see potential issues on the endpoints. If an AP or switch has a problem, you can drill down into those to see how it's affecting the endpoints.""Automatic network mapping, alerting functionalities, and TrafficInsights are valuable.""The topology map is good. It shows each device and whether it has a safe connection, how long it has been connected, and its activities. That's really helpful. Knowing the map helps our efficiency.""It's easy to get the information I need. I don't need to hunt for it or run queries to get it.""Automated configuration backups and automated network diagrams are the most valuable.""The biggest draw for me is the flexibility of being alerted. If something happens with my critical infrastructure, I get real-time alerts on it in Teams."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pros →

"VMware comes with a support team, and if you have trouble, you can easily create a ticket, and VMware will help you. Therefore, the best aspect is the support.""People are very pleased with the implementation.""This solution allows me to have true visibility for any metrics when it comes to my cloud, and private.""Tanzu itself, integrated with multiple solutions, bestows support and security upon a container platform, especially when it comes to managing open-source container platforms such as Kubernetes.""The features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities.""The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility.""The most valuable aspects of the solution are its ease of use and its ease of implementation.""For us, the ease of deployment in combination with TMZ was the most important part because we don't have to manually deploy a complex monitoring solution. We can more or less do that with the click of a button, and we are not dependent on the developers to provide us with all the necessary features and functions to make that work. We can just deploy it on a workload cluster and monitor at least a good part of the workload. If we want to go into detail, we clearly need to make changes, but for a good part of application monitoring, it gives us good insights."

More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pros →

Cons
"The pricing always has room for improvement.""It's missing the license checker feature. We are using Salesforce and the license is a really crucial part of the development, and we have to monitor it. Now, I have to write a script and then run it on a random Linux box and get a notification if it's expiring. It's a really specific feature. I'm not sure Auvik will develop it.""It needs flexibility for the pooling of information. Because it is fully automated, it is pooling everything from the device from a given category. There is no way to exclude things that are not important or if you want to temporarily remove them to see statistics of other things. For example, we get about 100 MB from Auvik. We are unable to limit this. We would rather stop monitoring something, since some features will always give you alerts, because they shouldn't be monitored. However, it is impossible to exclude them, e.g., the internal interface. If somebody disconnects the device from the internal interface, we get an alert. So, this is something that is really painful for us. More flexibility would solve most of our issues.""I requested that Auvik implement an alarm system to notify me immediately of any disruptions or anomalies.""The network mapping is just okay when I consider what I would typically see in a network map... that whole overview map in a single pane of glass can be pretty messy and a little bit of a performance hog on computers. The network mapping needs improvement in Auvik, as a whole.""Price sensitivity is an issue in the country where we use Auvik because of our exchange rate. It would be helpful if they could offer a slightly more affordable price in this region. I'd also like to see Auvik introduce more AI-driven features.""When we configured our network, there were some mismatches between the automatically-detected network topology and the actual topology. Some of the devices were not detected or were not supported by Auvik. We were able to manually modify things and everything has worked well since then.""The logging features could be a little bit better polished, although that aspect is relatively new. It comes in as raw data, with different formats for different vendors. It's not immediately clear to people what's going on with some of that and you have to read through the codes. Some of the higher-end logging solutions, like Splunk, which is very expensive, can parse through it and correlate items better. Improvement to the logging features would be a value-add, but I'm still very happy that it exists."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Cons →

"I would like to see integration with Kubernetes cluster and APIs so that you can manage the entire stack.""The initial setup should be easier and more seamless.""The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved.""Its billing model is consumption-based. I understand the consumption-based model, but it is not necessarily easy to estimate and guess how many points or how much we are going to consume on a specific application up until we get to that point. So, for us, it would be helpful to have more insights or predictability into what we can expect from a cost perspective if we are starting to use specific features. This can potentially also drive our consumption a bit more.""It could use a URL document server. Everything in the market is moving towards automation and everybody's looking for the single click operations as well relational data locality.""The implementation is a long process that should be improved.""They could make it more easy to plug-in data so that a nontechnical person will be able to use it, like accountants or finance people. That way they don't have to ask us.""In the new version, I would love to see more prediction capabilities. It would be great if one could see the alerts get a little more enriched with information and become more human-friendly instead of the technical stuff that they put in there. I think those would be really awesome outcomes to get."

More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "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 →

  • "Different locations require different setups. In your terms, around 300 to around 400K USD."
  • "I don't have the details. In our case, there is a mixture in place. We have production usage, and we are also doing training for VMware. So, we also have a training instance. It is worth the money you would spend on it. That's because if you were to build all of this yourself by using some of the open source tools, then you would need a lot of time."
  • "The licensing costs are very high, particularly when you consider that we have to purchase a level 1 license for every integration, such as the load balancer, HAProxy, and the MSSP. And if you want to use vSAN, that's another license. Then, of course, Tanzu Observability has its own separate license."
  • "I would rate the pricing as three out of five."
  • More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Auvik offers free monitoring for all devices except routers and firewalls. This includes devices like network-attached devices, PCs, and printers, making it cost-effective for monitoring a wide range… more »
    Top Answer:I find Auvik's pricing to be a good value for the features offered. With the professional plan costing around $15.30 per month per device, it is affordable, considering you only pay for active devices… more »
    Top Answer:In terms of improvement, while the network map and dashboards are generally easy to use, the NetFlow app can be a bit compressed and difficult to customize for better readability.
    Top Answer:VMware comes with a support team, and if you have trouble, you can easily create a ticket, and VMware will help you. Therefore, the best aspect is the support.
    Top Answer:It's hard to set up Tanzu clusters. It's hard to do a POC. Once you set up a customer's environment, you easily see the problems. The initial setup should be easier and more seamless.
    Ranking
    Views
    4,546
    Comparisons
    1,107
    Reviews
    100
    Average Words per Review
    1,347
    Rating
    8.7
    Views
    2,178
    Comparisons
    1,922
    Reviews
    4
    Average Words per Review
    549
    Rating
    8.3
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Tanzu Observability, Wavefront, Wavefront by VMware, VMware Tanzu Observability
    Learn More
    Overview

    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.

    VMware Tanzu Observability by Wavefront is a powerful tool for monitoring and analyzing the performance and availability of applications and infrastructure in real-time. 

    With its comprehensive monitoring capabilities, visualizing and analyzing data becomes effortless. The real-time alerting system ensures timely issue resolution, while scalability and a user-friendly interface provide a seamless experience for smooth operations.

    Sample Customers
    1. Atlassian 2. Cisco 3. Databricks 4. DigitalOcean 5. Equinix 6. Fidelity Investments 7. Google 8. Hewlett Packard Enterprise 9. Honeywell 10. IBM 11. Intel 12. JetBlue Airways 13. LinkedIn 14. Lyft 15. Mastercard 16. Microsoft 17. MongoDB 18. Netflix 19. Nvidia 20. Oracle 21. PayPal 22. Pinterest 23. Qualcomm 24. Red Hat 25. Salesforce 26. SAP 27. Spotify 28. Square 29. TMobile 30. Twitter 31. Uber 32. VMware
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company35%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Retailer7%
    Government7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Construction Company12%
    Educational Organization8%
    Government7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Government6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business70%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business44%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise44%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business30%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise67%
    Buyer's Guide
    Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. VMware Aria Operations for Applications
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. VMware Aria Operations for Applications and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 131 reviews while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 34th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 9 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is rated 7.6. 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 VMware Aria Operations for Applications writes "Easy to deploy, worth the money, and helpful for uptime monitoring and performance insights". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, Meraki Dashboard, SolarWinds NPM and Zabbix, whereas VMware Aria Operations for Applications is most compared with Dynatrace, Grafana, Datadog, Zabbix and Prometheus. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. VMware Aria Operations for Applications report.

    See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.

    We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.