Arista NDR vs Auvik Network Management (ANM) comparison

Arista and Auvik are both solutions in the Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) category. Arista is ranked #8 with an average rating of 9.0, while Auvik is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.6. Arista holds a 6.5% mindshare in NTA, compared to Auvik’s 2.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Arista users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 98% of Auvik users who would recommend it.

Arista NDR

Read 14 Arista NDR reviews

2,140 Views
963 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Read 201 Auvik Network Management (ANM) reviews

11,706 Views
936 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

Arista NDR

Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 6, 2024

Arista NDR and Auvik Network Management (ANM) cater to distinct network management needs. Arista NDR slightly edges out Auvik ANM in cybersecurity features while ANM stands out in network visualization.

Features: Arista NDR: robust threat detection, response capabilities, strong in cybersecurity. Auvik Network Management: network mapping, performance monitoring, comprehensive network visualization.

Room for Improvement: Arista NDR: improving integration capabilities, enhancing reporting features, better compatibility. Auvik Network Management: better real-time alerting, advanced troubleshooting tools, more immediate issue detection.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Arista NDR: straightforward deployment, effective customer service, responsiveness. Auvik Network Management: ease of deployment, knowledgeable assistance, slightly lesser degree of deployment ease.

Pricing and ROI: Arista NDR: higher pricing, strong ROI due to advanced security features. Auvik Network Management: more competitive pricing, significant ROI with network management capabilities, cost-effective network oversight.

To learn more, read our detailed Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM) Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM)

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,477 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Arista NDR

Ranking in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)

8th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Network Detection and Response (NDR) (11th)

Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Ranking in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)

2nd

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

201

Ranking in other categories

Network Monitoring Software (2nd), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (3rd), Network Troubleshooting (1st), Cloud Monitoring Software (4th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) category, the mindshare of Arista NDR is 6.5%, down from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is 2.8%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Auvik Network Management (ANM)	2.8%
Arista NDR	6.5%
Other	90.7%

Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)

Featured Reviews

reviewer1719513

Chief Technology Officer at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees

it's much easier to create your own queries and hunt for threats

We take in IOCs from my SOC and from AlienVault, and then we focus on traffic that hits IOCs and alerts us to it. The one thing that the Awake platform lacks is the ability to automate the ingestion of IOCs rather than having to import CSV files or JSON files manually. Awake didn't support the manual importation of CSV and JSON in version 3.0, but they added it in version 4.0. It's helpful, but it still has to be a specific CSV format. Automated IOCs are on the roadmap. Hopefully, they will be able to automate the ingestion of IOCs by Q1 next year. I'm currently leveraging Mind Meld, an open-source tool by Palo Alto, to ingest IOCs from external parties. I aggregate those lists and spit them out as a massive list of domains, hashes, file names, IPS. Then we aggregate those into their own specific categories, like a URL category. Awake ingests that just like the Palo Alto firewall does, and then it alerts me if traffic attempts to go into it. Some of that is already on the Palo Alto firewall, which blocks it, but that doesn't mean that there is no attempted communication. I want to know if there's a communication attempt because there might be an indicator on that specific device trying to reach an IOC. Yes, my Palo Alto blocked it, but there's still something odd sitting there, and what if it can reach a different IOC that I don't have information about? I want to focus on it. I could do that by leveraging Awake if it could ingest the IOCs automatically. That's something I leverage Awake for today. I still have to manually import it, which is cumbersome because I have to manipulate the files that I get from the different IOC providers into a specific format that it understands. Once they add the ability to automate that, it'll be more useful.

Read full review

HardeepSingh2

Senior operation command center Engineer at a real estate/law firm with 10,001+ employees

Centralized dashboard and real-time picture of the network improve efficiency

We have integrated Auvik Network Management with PRTG and our ServiceNow ticketing tool through API. It automatically creates notifications and sends them to Teams and our ticketing tool. It saves a lot of time. It saved 40% to 50% of our time. Auvik Network Management's network map, together with the dashboard, gives me a real-time picture of my network. It allows me to see the inventory under all sites and devices. My company has 55 sites. Whenever I want to go to a site, I can navigate the network path, and it provides me with the topology directly from source to destination. It shows all events, such as downtime or critical warnings, in an easy-to-use manner. It provides information about device interfaces, device bandwidth, latency, etc. I just need to click to view more detailed information. I have never found a scenario where Auvik Network Management did not allow me to find my site or any device. I can use global search to find my device or site and get the information easily. However, proper configuration within Auvik is critical for accurate reporting, covering all interfaces and their utilization. Using the automated documentation capabilities of Auvik Network Management is very easy. Over the last year, I have been continuously exploring this, finding that the API integration with our other platforms is straightforward, as it just requires configuration on both ends for proper communication. I didn't find any issue so far. It has been awesome. The network map dashboard of Auvik Network Management gives me full visibility into my network, making it easy to troubleshoot issues with inbuilt tools such as traceroute, ping, and SNMP. It helps diagnose problems quickly without having to type commands manually. Real-time performance insights from Auvik Network Management are very critical for my organization as we currently manage 55 sites with over 2,000 devices, and we need to keep track of numerous services such as Active Directory, DNS, and many protocols, so Auvik is essential as it consolidates everything on one dashboard. Auvik Network Management has decreased our mean time to resolution by 40% to 50%. It allows us to see traffic flow in real time without needing to guess. I can just log into the Auvik dashboard and quickly get results. Auvik Network Management helps my organization troubleshoot network issues proactively by providing alerts and monitoring. Instead of waiting for user feedback, we receive alerts on issues such as high latency or device failures directly on the dashboard. The impact of Auvik Network Management on reducing business disruptions related to network issues is significant. It reduces our downtime, improves security, and simplifies complex tasks into straightforward ones, making it the best tool for managing our complex network. We have configured multiple notification channels. We get alerts through email or integrated platforms such as Teams, which helps streamline communication. It makes it easy to collect information from various devices. We just need to configure the collector, IP addresses, and connections, and get approval from both ends. It creates a unique ID, and it can communicate with those devices.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Other solutions will say, "Hey, this device is doing something weird." But they don't aggregate that data point with other data points. With Awake you have what's called a "fact pattern." For example, if there's a smart toaster on the third floor that is beaconing out to an IP address in North Korea, sure that's bizarre. But if that toaster was made in North Korea it's not bizarre. Taking those two data points together, and automating something using machine-learning is something that no other solution is doing right now."

"The interface itself is clean and easy to use, yet customizable. I like that I can create my own dashboards fairly easily so that I can see what is important to me. Also, the query language is pretty easy to use. I haven't needed to use it a ton, but as I need to go in and do different queries based on their requests, it has been fairly simple to use."

"The query language that they have is quite valuable, especially because the sensor itself is storing some network activity and we're able to query that. That has been useful in a pinch because we don't necessarily use it just for threat hunting, but we also use it for debugging network issues. We can use it to ask questions and get answers about our network. For example: Which users and devices are using the VPN for RDP access? We can write a query pretty quickly and get an answer for that."

"Arista NDR's scalability is very good, making it easy to add more hardware components. You can order additional hardware and integrate it by stacking it with the existing setup. This feature cannot be seen in other NDR tools."

"The security knowledge graph has been very helpful in the sense that whenever you try a new security solution, especially one that's in the detection and response market, you're always worried about getting a lot of false positives or getting too many alerts and not being able to pick out the good from the bad or things that are actual security incidents versus normal day to day operations. We've been pleasantly surprised that Awake does a really good job of only alerting about things that we actually want to look into and understand. They do a good job of understanding normal operations out-of-the-box."

"The most valuable portion is that they offer a threat-hunting service. Using their platform, and all of the data that they're collecting, they actually help us be proactive by having really expert folks that have insight, not just into our accounts, but into other accounts as well. They can be proactive and say, 'Well, we saw this incident at some other customer. We ran that same kind of analysis for you and we didn't see that type of activity in your network.'"

"This solution help us monitor devices used on our network by insiders, contractors, partners, or suppliers. Its correlation and identification of specific endpoints is very good, especially since we have a large, virtualized environment. It discerns this fairly well. Some of the issues that we have had with other tools is we sometimes are not able to tell the difference between users on some of those virtualized instances."

"It gives us something that is almost like an auditing tool for all of our network controls, to see how they are performing. This is related to compliance so that we can see how we are doing with what we have already implemented. There are things that we implemented, but we really didn't know if they were working or not. We have that visibility now."

More Arista NDR pros

"I like Auvik's alerts. We can configure the alerts for a specific timeframe, i.e., we can set it to alert us when devices have been offline for a specific amount of minutes. If a device or port is flapping, we can ignore it or allow only the first alert to come in and mute the subsequent alerts."

"Being able to see things like the hardware lifecycle, if our equipment is up to date, if connections are broken, or whether there are physical line breaks, is helpful. We're able to determine connectivity issues. We can monitor pretty much anything that is network-related."

"The notifications for events are valuable. If a copier is low on toner, I can get the toner ordered instead of being surprised when it runs out. It saves me from running around and having to check a lot of things."

"The discovery portion of it is extremely valuable. It allows us to get a good inventory of what is actually on a client's network. You can turn on TrafficInsights, which is basically a NetFlow feature, for troubleshooting. It allows you to get more detailed information on what's going on with a particular device. So, you could determine why a client is complaining that the internet is slow at 1:00 p.m. every day."

"Shadow IT monitoring is huge for us since so many of our customers are highly regulated."

"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."

"The appeal lies in the unified dashboard, providing a single view encompassing all aspects of my network."

"The stability is rock solid."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) pros

Cons

"I enjoy the query language, but it could be a bit more user-friendly, especially for new users who come across it... They should push it more into a natural language style as opposed to a query language."

"They've been focused on really developing their data science, their ability to detect, but over time, they need to be able to tie into other systems because other systems might detect something that they don't."

"One thing I would like to see is a little bit more education or experience on AWS cloud for their managed services team. We've explained how we have the information set up, that the traffic coming in goes to the AWS load balancer and then gets sent on to our internal servers... but when I get notices they always tell me this traffic is coming from the IPs belonging to the load balancers, not the source IPs. So a little bit more education for their team about how AWS manages the traffic might help out."

"Be prepared to update your SOPs to have your analysts work in another tool separately. There are some limitations in the integrations right now. One of the things that I want from a security standpoint is integration with multiple tools so I don't need to have my analysts logging into each individual tool."

"One concern I do have with Awake is that, ideally, it should be able identify high-risk users and devices and entities. However, we don't have confidence in their entity resolution, and we've provided this feedback to Awake. My understanding is that this is where some of the AI/ML is, and it hasn't been reliable in correctly identifying which device an activity is associated with. We have also encountered issues where it has merged two devices into one entity profile when they shouldn't be merged. The entity resolution is the weakest point of Awake so far."

"I would like to see a bit more in terms of encrypted traffic. With the advent of programs that live off the land, a smart attacker is going to leverage encryption to execute their operation. So I would like to see improvements there, where possible. Currently, we're not going to be decrypting encrypted traffic. What other approaches could be used?"

"While the appliance is very good, and I think they're working on it, it would probably help if they integrated the management team cases into the appliance so that everything we are working on with them would be accessible on our platform, on the dashboard, on the portal. Right now, Awake is just an additional team that uses the appliance that we use and then we communicate with them directly. Communication isn't through the portal."

"Awake Security needs to move to a 24/7 support model in the MNDR space. Once they do that, it will make them even better."

More Arista NDR cons

"If the out-of-the-box price was about 30% lower, I think it would have allowed us to purchase it sooner. It definitely costs more than some of the competitors that are out there. It's also better, so I understand why it's a little bit more expensive."

"The dashboard needs to be more intuitive."

"There's room for improvement in the interface."

"I would like to see more extensive syslog capabilities. It can ingest syslogs and I think it can alert based on quantities of messages. You can also look back at some of the messages, but it's not a forensics level syslog."

"More options in the network map of Auvik Network Management (ANM) would be beneficial."

"The use of a mobile app would be very beneficial because sometimes I cannot access a computer."

"I would like to see some better training or public resources. It's not just Auvik's fault. Our company has a responsibility to explain the toolset and everything it can do. Many of our engineers don't realize how powerful it is. Due to a lack of documentation about Auvik's capabilities, so much can go over the heads of engineers who don't spend much time with it."

"I require the monitoring of Linux devices and it doesn't support them. Although we've done a trial, we're not going to carry on with it. We've already gone with another product. Also, seeing the topology is quite useful, but it's not really suitable for a large enterprise."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing seems pretty reasonable for what we get out of it. We also found it to be more competitive than some other vendors that we've looked at."

"Awake's pricing was very competitive. It's not a cheap option though. It's an investment to utilize it, but it's one that we decided was worth the cost, with the managed services. At our scale, it was a much better option to utilize their software and their managed services to handle this, rather than hiring another person to be an analyst. It was quite cost-effective for us."

"The solution is very good and the pricing is also better than others..."

"The solution has saved thousands of dollars within the first day. Our ROI has to be in the tens of thousands of dollars since October last year."

"Because I represent a hedge fund, I have some leverage. I told them that they had to meet my conditions if they wanted me as a client. It was the same way with Awake. They wanted an initial four-year agreement. Initially, we signed on for a one-year contract, but they wanted the four-year deal when it came time for the renewal. I told them that I was not doing that. I said that they either had to do it on my terms, or I'd go somewhere else."

"Awake Security was the least expensive among their competitors. Everyone was within $15,000 of each other. The other solutions were not providing the MNDR service, which is standard with Awake Security's pricing/licensing model."

"We switched to Awake Security because they were able to offer a model that was significantly less expensive and the value that we get out of it is higher."

"The pricing is kind of steep, but it's worth the price. There's no beating around the bush. It's an expensive solution, but it's really the best solution there is for us."

"The pricing could be tiered so that you get a discount for more devices. We're fairly early on in the billing process, but it could be slightly cheaper."

"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."

"Auvik isn't cheap. There are two tiers: Essentials and Performance. We're still on the Essentials plan, but we may upgrade to Performance, which is double the price."

"For small businesses with many devices, the tool is potentially unaffordable. Auvik Networks Inc. is competing with other companies offering very expensive products. Still, there's a gap in the market and potentially a lot of lost revenue for smaller customers, especially those with complex IT environments."

"Auvik's pricing is fair overall, but some advanced stuff is a little expensive. I like that the licensing model is based on switches instead of endpoints. We don't use some of the more advanced features because they're a little beyond our price range. We're using the tool internally, but the expense is passed on to the customer, and the advanced features aren't something that most customers are willing to pay for."

"Auvik is affordable. The license was under $4,000 annually for our setup. That covers a lot of switches, firewalls, and integration. It was well worth the price. I think it's around $20 per device per quarter."

"The pricing is pretty reasonable for what we get. It's billed by certain, core network devices that it monitors, but I'm not billed for all the devices it monitors. For example, wireless access points and small things like that, throughout the network, are not billed."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,477 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

13%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	7

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	141
Midsize Enterprise	31
Large Enterprise	22

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Arista NDR?

Arista NDR's scalability is very good, making it easy to add more hardware components. You can order additional hardware and integrate it by stacking it with the existing setup. This feature cannot...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Arista NDR?

The tool's pricing is expensive but it is competitive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Arista NDR?

Arista NDR needs to open legal offices to be closer to customers and partners. It needs more visibility in the NDR market in the Middle East. While they are doing well, they lack sufficient enginee...

See all answers

What do you like most about Auvik?

The most valuable feature for us in Auvik is the network topology.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Auvik?

Auvik Network Management (ANM) pricing or licensing is about 2,500 per year for approximately 4,000 endpoints, which is quite reasonable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Auvik?

I think the interface is a little clunky at times, and I've definitely had some frustrations with it over the years. One thing that was kind of a big issue was that if you were trying to go to a ra...

See all answers

Comparisons

Vectra AI vs Arista NDR

Compared 17% of the time

Darktrace vs Arista NDR

Compared 15% of the time

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs Arista NDR

Compared 11% of the time

Trend Micro Deep Discovery vs Arista NDR

Compared 7% of the time

Sangfor Cyber Command vs Arista NDR

Compared 3% of the time

More Arista NDR Competitors

PRTG Network Monitor vs Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Compared 8% of the time

Zabbix vs Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Compared 6% of the time

Domotz Pro vs Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Compared 6% of the time

Nagios XI vs Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Compared 5% of the time

LogicMonitor vs Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Compared 5% of the time

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Arista NDR

January 2026

Download Arista NDR product report

Buyer's Guide

Auvik Network Management (ANM)

January 2026

Download Auvik Network Management (ANM) product report

Also Known As

Awake Security Platform

No data available

Overview

Arista NDR (formerly Awake Security) is the only advanced network detection and response company that delivers answers, not alerts. By combining artificial intelligence with human expertise, Arista NDR hunts for both insider and external attacker behaviors, while providing autonomous triage and response with full forensics across traditional, IoT, and cloud networks. Arista NDR delivers continuous diagnostics for the entire enterprise threat landscape, processes countless network data points, senses abnormalities or threats, and reacts if necessary—all in a matter of seconds. The Arista NDP platform stands out from traditional security because it is designed to mimic the human brain. It recognizes malicious intent and learns over time, giving defenders greater visibility and insight into what threats exist and how to respond to them.

The Advent of Advanced Network Detection and Response & Why it Matters

The 5 Levels of Autonomous Security paper

Arista

Auvik Network Management provides comprehensive network monitoring with competitive pricing, offering advanced features and free management of non-critical devices.

Auvik Network Management is known for its intuitive interface and real-time network visibility. Users benefit from features like automated network discovery, mapping, alerting, and TrafficInsights for cost-effective bandwidth monitoring. Its integration with ConnectWise and ticketing systems enhances device inventory updates, SNMP monitoring, and network troubleshooting. However, improvements are needed in reporting, integration capabilities, network map accuracy, customization, and alert configuration. Users suggest expanding device support and improving navigation and monitoring features.

What are Auvik's most important features?

Automated Network Discovery: Seamless identification and mapping of network devices.
Real-Time Visibility: Immediate insights into network performance and health.
Configuration Management: Automated backups and configuration control.
TrafficInsights: Monitor bandwidth use without expensive decryption.
Remote Access: Efficient remote management and troubleshooting.

What benefits should users look for in Auvik reviews?

Cost-Effectiveness: Pay only for critical devices, manage others for free.
Integration: Works with ConnectWise and ticketing systems for streamlined management.
Ease of Use: User-friendly design for quick deployment and operation.
Proactive Alerting: Identify and address network issues swiftly.
Rapid Deployment: Quick setup and immediate use across networks.

Auvik Network Management is widely used by managed service providers and enterprises for network monitoring across industries. It enables efficient management of firewalls, switches, routers, and ensures connectivity over multiple locations. This solution aids in identifying issues, automating backups, and facilitating remote access, offering critical insights on network traffic and device performance. Companies leverage its features to enhance network management and performance.

Auvik

Sample Customers

- Dolby Laboratories- Seattle Genetics- ARM Energy- Ooma- Prophix- Yapstone

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM)

December 2025

Free Report: Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM)

Find out what your peers are saying about Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM) and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,477 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM) report.

See our list of best Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) vendors.

We monitor all Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) 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.