No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.
PeerSpot user
SR system engineer at a retailer with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Jul 7, 2026
Network management has become centralized and saves time with automatic discovery and alerts
Pros and Cons
  • "If you are looking to manage your network, Auvik Network Management (ANM) is a very good tool."
  • "I chose eight out of ten because sometimes I face slow performance issues, which is why I am cutting two points from the score."

What is our primary use case?

My main use case for Auvik Network Management (ANM) is to manage my office network. I currently use Auvik Network Management (ANM) for managing my network, and for any configuration changes or security policy, I apply directly from here to all devices.

What is most valuable?

The best feature that Auvik Network Management (ANM) offers is the auto discovery feature, which discovers all the devices from my network automatically.

The auto-discovery feature helps me day-to-day by saving a lot of time. Auvik Network Management (ANM) positively impacts my organization by creating alerts if any device is turned off or down, and it also creates a network topology map, which is very helpful.

The alerts and the network topology map have helped my team by saving a lot of time and preventing issues. For instance, I recently faced a network down issue, and this tool helped us identify which device was related to the network down.

What needs improvement?

Currently, there is no need for any other improvement, as Auvik Network Management (ANM) is a very mature product according to current market technology.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Auvik Network Management (ANM) for the last two years.

Buyer's Guide
Auvik Network Management (ANM)
October 2026
Learn what your peers think about Auvik Network Management (ANM). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2026.
919,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I chose eight out of ten because sometimes I face slow performance issues, which is why I am cutting two points from the score.

How are customer service and support?

Regarding Auvik Network Management (ANM) AI capabilities, its governance and security are very good. As for Auvik Network Management (ANM) AI capabilities, its accuracy and reliability of output are very good. For the current market, it is very good, and all the features will be available in this tool.

What other advice do I have?

Auvik Network Management (ANM) is a very mature product that I am using in network management, and it is very good according to the current scenario and all the availability. If you are looking to manage your network, Auvik Network Management (ANM) is a very good tool. It is helpful to draw a diagram with all the topology, and it helps to manage everything in a single dashboard. No other tool is available like this. I rate this product eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Last updated: Jul 7, 2026
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Pranav Salian - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Business Operations at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Oct 24, 2026
Monitoring has reduced network troubleshooting time and prevents downtime with real-time visibility
Pros and Cons
  • "Auvik Network Management (ANM) has helped decrease our mean time to resolution by 60%."

    What is our primary use case?

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) is utilized by our in-house team for network monitoring and maintenance, and it helps provide 24/7 coverage.

    We use Auvik Network Management (ANM) for continuous monitoring of our network workloads and uptime. It also helps us identify issues in terms of downtime and avoid them to prevent long-term downtime.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) positively impacts our organization as it helps us manage network traffic and network workloads separately, and for SOC monitoring, we can manage that separately using a different platform. This helps us segregate both and avoid mixing everything together into one platform, which can be quite confusing.

    The specific outcomes I have seen include definitely faster troubleshooting. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is able to help us pinpoint exactly where an issue exists rather than our team having to search all the nodes or figure out where an issue could be. This definitely helped in reducing our troubleshoot time by at least 60 to 70%.

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) has helped decrease our mean time to resolution by 60%. It has helped our organization troubleshoot network issues proactively by constantly checking network uptime and helping ensure that we try to fix issues before there is downtime or major downtime.

    What is most valuable?

    The best features Auvik Network Management (ANM) offers include monitoring various network devices, providing many dashboards and useful reports for our team to visualize, and being able to pinpoint wherever there is an issue.

    The specific feature or type of report that our team finds most valuable from the dashboards and reports is mainly for our firewall devices, which we monitor at the perimeter level. Those reports are most useful.

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) provides dashboards, alerts, and key reports as configured, which helps us pinpoint and figure out network issues.

    Auvik's network map along with its dashboard gives us a real-time picture of our network. It is quite easy and also customizable to use the network map and dashboard to gain real-time visibility into our network.

    I assess the ease of gaining instant visibility into our network health with Auvik Network Management (ANM) as very easy because of dashboards. We have different dashboards for different device types from the network standpoint, so it helps in providing separate views and also an overall view. Using Auvik Network Management (ANM) overall is quite easy.

    It is quite useful for our team to utilize the automated documentation capabilities of Auvik Network Management (ANM). The network map dashboard provides us full network visibility, and it is important to have this full network visibility to know exactly from a network standpoint what is happening, what changes have been made, and where there is an issue.

    Real-time performance insight is definitely important for our organization because we run critical services that operate 24/7, so real-time visibility is useful.

    What needs improvement?

    Regarding how Auvik Network Management (ANM) can be improved, there is nothing really to add as a major improvement. I don't have anything to add about needed improvements, even minor ones. It is doing its job for what we have purchased it for.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Auvik Network Management (ANM) for over the past two years.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) overall as nine out of ten. I chose nine out of ten because it is a really good platform for network monitoring and management.

    My advice for others looking into using Auvik Network Management (ANM) is that it's definitely important to implement or do a proof of concept before you buy.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Private Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
    Last updated: Oct 24, 2026
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Auvik Network Management (ANM)
    October 2026
    Learn what your peers think about Auvik Network Management (ANM). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2026.
    919,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    System Administrator
    Real User
    Top 20
    Jul 2, 2025
    Successfully uses a straightforward interface for swift network management and device login
    Pros and Cons
    • "I appreciate the ability to log in to different switches with the click of a button, using the SNMP map and having that login information there, because it allows you to skip going through each IP individually and trying to log in manually."
    • "The only issue I see is that the pricing was a bit much for our needs; if they could break it down into specific pricing points to be more affordable for larger companies, that would help, as getting that through the budget team was challenging."

    What is our primary use case?

    My use case for Auvik Network Management (ANM) has been network management, as the company I was with at the time had a lot of networks and networks that they didn't even know existed. They hadn't had IT in 10 years, so we had to do a little bit of network management and I had to find all their switches, IPs, and things like that. 

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) was an excellent tool for that. Being able to hone in on networks by just putting it on the DC server and sending out those pings really allowed me to build a network. I

    appreciate the ability to log in to different switches with the click of a button, using the SNMP map and having that login information there, because it allows you to skip going through each IP individually and trying to log in manually.

    What is most valuable?

    The interface of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is by far the easiest to use. I've worked with ThousandEyes, I've worked with ELK, and Auvik Network Management (ANM) was the better option, easily. The interface is straight and dry, and I appreciate the fact that when I started using it, I got a chance to see that physical, visual mapping of all my switches and what they're connected to. The dashboard of Auvik Network Management (ANM) gives me full network visibility without needing other software; I didn't have too many problems with the dashboard overall, and it was quite good. 

    The network visibility provided by Auvik Network Management (ANM) is very important for my company because we want to be able to detect and address issues efficiently. One thing that ThousandEyes has over Auvik Network Management (ANM) is that it can detect bottlenecks faster, identifying what causes network space to clutter. Auvik Network Management (ANM) does something similar, but not as in-depth as ThousandEyes.

    What needs improvement?

    I had thought about requesting an AI interface for Auvik Network Management (ANM), but I think they already have that now. The only issue I see is that the pricing was a bit much for our needs; if they could break it down into specific pricing points to be more affordable for larger companies, that would help, as getting that through the budget team was challenging.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Auvik Network Management (ANM) for about a year and a half in my career.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    I haven't seen any problems with stability using Auvik Network Management (ANM), such as lagging, crashing, or downtime.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The scalability of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is excellent, rating at the highest level possible.

    How are customer service and support?

    I did have to contact customer support for Auvik Network Management (ANM), and it was difficult to try to get in touch with the sales representatives. They have a general number along with personal numbers that some of them call from. One representative, Josh, was really good and fantastic; I just didn't have his number. I had to call regular support, which was challenging to get to the specific representative I wanted. However, when I did reach him, he was great.

    How was the initial setup?

    The deployment process and installation of Auvik Network Management (ANM) were great. The fact that they walk you through a demo on how to set it up was amazing. It was straightforward; you just install it on your DC server, and it sends out all the pings to different servers or switches and routers to gather information. As long as you have the correct login, you're good.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    When comparing Auvik Network Management (ANM) and ThousandEyes, I prefer Auvik Network Management (ANM) because I prefer the interface. The interface is easier to understand and use—there aren't many extra tidbits to go through. You can just get straight to the data, click on a device, and configure it if needed. I found ThousandEyes more difficult to use.

    What other advice do I have?

    I was managing one plant on the East Coast with Auvik Network Management (ANM) and I managed to possibly get one in another state, without any significant issues. It can be cluttered if you manage around 700 sites, but for smaller scale, it works perfectly. 

    It took me about a day to fully understand how to use Auvik Network Management (ANM), so the learning curve was quite manageable. 

    For maintenance as an end user, there are no updates required on their end, but it does inform me when I need to update and configure policies on switches and routers. I actually had to do that on a firewall as well. 

    I would rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) overall as 20 out of 10.

    Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
    PeerSpot user
    Syed Fasih Uddin - PeerSpot reviewer
    Core Services Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
    MSP
    Top 10
    Dec 5, 2024
    User-friendly platform significantly enhances network monitoring and proactive issue management
    Pros and Cons
    • "Its proactive monitoring and simplified troubleshooting have significantly impacted our efficiency in handling network management tasks."
    • "Auvik Network Management is user-friendly and intuitive."
    • "The network maps can be confusing due to the wide scope of the network, making it difficult to find specific details."
    • "The customer service and support are rated as six out of ten. Although the support is good, resolving time takes longer than expected, especially for major issues that require escalation."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use Auvik Network Management primarily for network purposes, including monitoring and optimizing alerts. It provides an easy-to-use interface that is user-friendly, even for those who may not be familiar with navigating network platforms.

    What is most valuable?

    Auvik Network Management is user-friendly and intuitive. It simplifies troubleshooting network issues and provides a real-time picture of the network through its dashboard. 

    The features support ease of use, making it accessible even for new users. Its proactive monitoring and simplified troubleshooting have significantly impacted our efficiency in handling network management tasks.

    What needs improvement?

    The network maps can be confusing due to the wide scope of the network, making it difficult to find specific details. Improvements in the network exclusions part would be helpful, as well as enhancements in API functionality and wider tool support for integration with PSA or RMM tools.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Auvik Network Management for one year.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability of Auvik Network Management is rated as seven out of ten. There were a few instances of downtime in the year, which took some time to resolve.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I rate the scalability of Auvik Network Management as eight out of ten. The platform scales well and supports our organizational needs.

    How are customer service and support?

    The customer service and support are rated as six out of ten. Although the support is good, resolving time takes longer than expected, especially for major issues that require escalation.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Neutral

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We use Meraki as well for network management.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup of Auvik Network Management is straightforward and not complex. Setting up new users takes about 20 minutes, and the whole setup process can take around two hours.

    What about the implementation team?

    I set up Auvik Network Management for new users in the organization.

    What was our ROI?

    The return on investment from using Auvik Network Management is estimated at three to four percent due to the time saved in managing network issues efficiently.

    What other advice do I have?

    I highly recommend Auvik Network Management because it is used by many firms and is a reliable application. 

    Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Other
    Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
    PeerSpot user
    Evans Vasavan - PeerSpot reviewer
    Security Engineer at GlobeSecure Technologies Pvt Ltd
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Jul 6, 2026
    Automated monitoring has improved incident resolution and centralized control of network devices
    Pros and Cons
    • "Since using Auvik Network Management (ANM), I have seen a positive impact, including reduced report times, continuous monitoring of network traffic, faster incident resolution, and the ability to centrally control every network device."
    • "Auvik Network Management (ANM) can be improved with real-time troubleshooting and logs alerts, as it should provide real-time monitoring and logs alerts to help me perform actions immediately, along with the feature of automatic configuration backup, so I do not have to take backups of firmware and policies manually."

    What is our primary use case?

    My main use case for Auvik Network Management (ANM) is network monitoring, configuration backups, and remote management, which is the primary purpose of it.

    A specific example of how I use Auvik Network Management (ANM) for network monitoring and remote management in my daily routine is that it automates network discovery by discovering all the networks in my environment, including many devices such as routers, switches, firewalls, access points, and servers. It continuously monitors the traffic, CPU, memory, and bandwidth utilization, and provides me with the entire report in a single console. It also analyzes the traffic flow, provides alerts, and for remote users, it shows utilization based on their communication with firewalls.

    What is most valuable?

    The best features Auvik Network Management (ANM) offers are the clarity of the report, Root Cause Analysis (RCA), faster processes, reduced network downtime, and the automation that has already been configured.

    When I mention root cause analysis and automation, these features help me in my day-to-day work by providing proper reports in any situation, allowing me to give timely answers regarding the root cause when customers ask. This application helps me provide that report on time, which is beneficial, especially for network downtime. For example, I can upgrade any firmware or hotfix without any downtime.

    Since using Auvik Network Management (ANM), I have seen a positive impact, including reduced report times, continuous monitoring of network traffic, faster incident resolution, and the ability to centrally control every network device. Regarding faster incident resolution with Auvik Network Management (ANM), before it took time, but now I get the results within five to ten minutes.

    What needs improvement?

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) can be improved with real-time troubleshooting and logs alerts, as it should provide real-time monitoring and logs alerts to help me perform actions immediately, along with the feature of automatic configuration backup, so I do not have to take backups of firmware and policies manually.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working in my current field for the past four to five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) is quite stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scalability of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is good, and I would rate it a nine on a scale of ten.

    How are customer service and support?

    Customer support from Auvik Network Management (ANM) is good.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    From the beginning, we have been using Auvik Network Management (ANM) technology.

    How was the initial setup?

    I am from the technical department, so the pricing, setup cost, and licensing aspects have been managed by the management.

    What about the implementation team?

    Auvik Network Management (ANM) was purchased from the vendor, not through the AWS Marketplace.

    What was our ROI?

    So far, we are satisfied with Auvik Network Management (ANM), and it is a return on investment, although details regarding money and metrics have been taken care of by the management team.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I am from the technical department, so the pricing, setup cost, and licensing aspects have been managed by the management.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I have not evaluated other options; we went directly for Auvik Network Management (ANM).

    What other advice do I have?

    I would advise others looking into using Auvik Network Management (ANM) to choose the Auvik solution if they want close monitoring in their environment. I would rate this product a nine overall.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Vendor associated with organization
    Last updated: Jul 6, 2026
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Windows & Network System Administrator
    Real User
    Top 10
    Apr 25, 2025
    Amazing at discovering the network and alerting us
    Pros and Cons
    • "The best feature of Auvik Network Management is simplicity. It is friendly to use."
    • "Auvik Network Management reduced the downtime and sped up the recovery."
    • "I did not have the chance to go through all the aspects or services that Auvik Network Management provides, but what I dealt with was good, and there was not much to complain about. However, its pricing was a little bit higher."
    • "However, its pricing was a little bit higher."

    What is our primary use case?

    I used to work with an organization supporting multiple clients. We implemented Auvik Network Management for some of them, not all of them. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    It was interesting how fast Auvik Network Management could discover the network, how it kept monitoring it and updating us with alerts of any spikes in the traffic, and everything else. It was amazing.

    Auvik Network Management reduced the downtime and sped up the recovery.

    Auvik Network Management helped our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets on their own because it simplifies the process. It lets you find where the problems are faster. It gives you a clearer view of the situation, where you can see the complete network in front of you graphically. You can see all the devices and where the problem is. When you highlight one of them, you can see all the details.

    Auvik Network Management decreased issues because it allowed us to monitor the entire network, all the devices, and check the alerts in a timely manner. We could deal with issues quickly.

    What is most valuable?

    The best feature of Auvik Network Management is simplicity. It is friendly to use. 

    The dashboard is good. It gives a clear vision for all the aspects of the services that Auvik Network Management provides. We can go to different places and monitor, check, configure, and analyze traffic.

    What needs improvement?

    I did not have the chance to go through all the aspects or services that Auvik Network Management provides, but what I dealt with was good, and there was not much to complain about. However, its pricing was a little bit higher. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I used Auvik Network Management for a couple of months. It was implemented in 2024.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It was stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We dealt with different clients, from small to large ones. We used Auvik Network Management on all of them. It was capable of handling all those clients perfectly.

    How are customer service and support?

    We used their customer service directly. We did not rely much on the documentation. Whenever we had any issues, we used to call their support centers and book a meeting with them.

    We had a couple of meetings with them. They introduced the product to us and explained how to deal with it. They had their own support, and we relied on them.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We used N-able previously. Auvik Network Management was implemented to replace N-able in a certain phase. N-able is similar to Auvik Network Management without the graphics, but it has alerting, monitoring, controlling, updating, and patching capabilities.

    N-able is an old product. It is not as modern as Auvik Network Management. Auvik Network Management is easier to deal with and faster to get results from.

    How was the initial setup?

    It was easy. Auvik Network Management was very easy to set up. It does everything by itself.

    It was a matter of minutes to set it up. It did not take a long time to start gathering information. After we installed it on one of our machines, it started gathering information and drawing the network. It is very reliable.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing was a little bit higher. They can work on that as everybody wants to save money.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate Auvik Network Management a nine out of ten.

    Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
    PeerSpot user
    Craig Wardman - PeerSpot reviewer
    Automation & Project Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
    Real User
    Jun 4, 2024
    Great interface, easy setup, and good visibility
    Pros and Cons
    • "If it's purely network monitoring, it's absolutely brilliant. It shows ups and downs, and provides a lot more information than you generally need."
    • "Things are easily confused if there are multiple data feeds."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use the solution pretty much for what it was designed for. We use it for network monitoring and its dashboards. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    We were trying to solve for visibility more than anything else. The monitoring we do is more preventative than remedial. In the time we've used it, we've migrated a lot. It's helping us more on the understanding and project management side rather than monitoring. 

    What is most valuable?

    The ease of setup is one of its most valuable aspects. 

    The visibility and topology diagrams are great. The dashboarding is quite useful.

    Its integration with ConnectWise has been the most beneficial for managing our network performance. 

    Auvik is a bit of a capturing tool. For us, we can highlight the high-level elements and problems. Our network is relatively secure, so we haven't actually used it for alerting. However, it is there as a preventative and monitoring measure more than anything else. 

    The interface is great once the configuration is done. 

    We do get a real-time picture of our network. The visibility we get is around 95%, with the remaining 5% our fault, based on the way we're set up.

    The solution has helped decrease our mean time to resolution. However, it varies, depending upon the severity, for example. It's reducing any networking tickets time to resolution somewhat. For example, we are moving some clients from one subnet to another, and in those circumstances, it's taking half the time for us to do that in a process way. 

    If it's purely network monitoring, it's absolutely brilliant. It shows ups and downs, and provides a lot more information than you generally need. However, since we know it provides a lot more information, we use it for lots of different things.

    It reduced our mean time to resolution by 20% to 30% across the board. 

    For our second line, third line, our network teams, it has increased productivity and reduced time source solutions by about 10% to 15%. 

    What needs improvement?

    As with all SMP's monitoring tools, it's a little difficult to get exactly where it needs to be until you've completed your desktop.

    We're a bit complicated as a use case as we've got data centers and clients. We're mixed management with multiple subnets. If the network was simpler, it would work perfectly. There are a couple of overlaps. Things could be clearer.

    Things are easily confused if there are multiple data feeds. So, if we have a server with three of our network clouds, it won't necessarily get the hierarchy accurate. Being able to drag and influence them in the network map would make a lot more sense. Therefore, being able to influence the map manually and overwrite it or customize it would make a lot of sense.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for about a year and a half. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have the solution in multiple locations, for example, in data centers, client sites, and offices. We don't have a huge amount of endpoints. We do have a cloud platform and use it to monitor that. Our clients are largely SMBs.

    How are customer service and support?

    We've had no requirement to be in touch with support just yet. 

    The only instance of reaching out was when we raised a query during the first time installation. It was a deployment query, and it resolved almost instantly. If we understood the solution a bit more, we could have solved the issue ourselves. 

    There is good technical support documentation. There are elements that need to be kept up-to-date, however. They could refresh it a bit more. That said, it's not really a problem or enough to complain about. There are too many changes happening in the industry for any documentation to be perfect. 

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We've used all kinds of solutions. We do have SolarWinds instances, for example, however, we don't tend to use them much. We've also used PRTG. Auvik is faster to set up.

    How was the initial setup?

    The deployment was simple. We implemented it in half an hour. 

    What about the implementation team?

    We did have a vendor assist us with the deployment process. 

    What was our ROI?

    While I couldn't quantify it at this time, we have definitely seen an ROI. 

    It certainly helped out with one of the projects that we're involved with. Whilst we've had it for 18 months, we've really only embraced it over the last six and we won't really see figures from it until the end of next quarter.

    We've likely saved five to six hours a week so far.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution is a little on the expensive side. That may be skewed for us since we use it more as a monitoring and preventative tool, and largely it's meant to be a remediation tool. While it is expensive, it's not so much so that it makes me want to switch.

    What other advice do I have?

    We're an Auvik customer and partner. 

    While the solution has not yet empowered our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets on their own, they will be able to soon. We're just moving across to utilizing more alerting and bespoke alerting. We're telling Auvik some of the things that we want to know and don't want to know. That is now starting to power the help desk. That change has been happening over the last week. So, by the end of this week, it will be.

    I'd recommend the solution to others. Its ease of deployment and ability to provide basic information about a network, and monitoring basic information about a network, is actually very good. It puts things on the screen almost immediately. When alerts fire, it points to those alerts, and you can literally click through and find the problem almost instantly. The only negatives are around some things that you would expect. That said, overall, absolutely, I would recommend it. The peace of deployment and ease of information are worth it. It's very, very easy to understand. It's very, very easy to see where your problems are, and it's very, very easy to use that information to remediate the problems. However, for my advanced monitoring, it's a little more difficult to understand exactly where the information is coming from and how it's utilizing the information. 

    I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    PeerSpot user
    Dan Salazar - PeerSpot reviewer
    Technology Systems Manager at Chelten House Products, Inc.
    Real User
    Dec 13, 2023
    The network map and dashboard offer a real-time overview of our network
    Pros and Cons
    • "The cloud monitoring portion of Auvik that provides visibility into each piece of my infrastructure is the most valuable feature."
    • "The use of a mobile app would be very beneficial because sometimes I cannot access a computer."

    What is our primary use case?

    I use Auvik to create a network topology map for my business, which also serves as a monitoring tool for any downtime or issues within our company's network infrastructure. As a production company, we require continuous operation, so a tool like Auvik provides valuable visual insight even when I'm not physically present.

    We previously had a basic alerting system in place, but it was not sufficient when we experienced networking issues within one of our two buildings. Often, it was unclear which cables were connected to which devices and where the connections led. Auvik, unlike other tools I've used, excels at visualizing these connections, making it easier for me to identify the source of the problem.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Auvik's interface is one of the most intuitive interfaces I've used.

    The ease of use makes troubleshooting network issues easier and faster.

    Auvik's network map and dashboard offer a real-time overview of our network. I rely on it daily, starting my workday by checking it for any potential issues and then adjusting my priorities accordingly.

    I found the dashboard very easy to understand and easy to manipulate and customize.

    The network map dashboard typically provides me with full network visibility. I haven't encountered any instances where something wasn't displayed within the network from Auvik's perspective. Even for devices where I haven't explicitly provided credentials, Auvik still manages to identify and display them, ensuring comprehensive network visibility.

    I am the only technician that uses Auvik in my organization and it has empowered me to come up with better solutions to solving our tickets.

    Auvik has helped decrease our mean time to resolution.

    Auvik's value became immediately apparent when we needed to investigate an issue causing a server cluster to intermittently shut down. Auvik accurately detected and reported the problem, pinpointing the exact location and nature of the fault, including the specific port experiencing instability. This information was invaluable in resolving the issue quickly. We have encountered other scenarios where Auvik's responsiveness surpasses even our power distribution units. For example, in an instance of power loss within a specific room, Auvik alerted us significantly faster than the PDU itself. This enhanced speed significantly improves our ability to react to critical situations.

    Auvik allows me to spend less time on setup, maintenance, and issue resolution. 

    What is most valuable?

    The cloud monitoring portion of Auvik that provides visibility into each piece of my infrastructure is the most valuable feature.

    What needs improvement?

    The use of a mobile app would be very beneficial because sometimes I cannot access a computer. Additionally, I believe that more monitoring could be done on certain devices, especially since we have credentials for them. Ideally, there should be more comprehensive monitoring for endpoints, such as switches, firewalls, workstations, and even servers. Support for other hypervisors would also be valuable.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Auvik for just over one year.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The Auvik website experiences occasional stability issues, which may coincide with their frequent maintenance windows. Although they perform maintenance at least once a week, my monitoring has not identified any significant delays in reporting.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Auvik is highly scalable. While the price does increase as it scales up, it is remarkably easy to deploy, even to new sites. I have done this myself. I have also restructured the network topology twice since I started using Auvik, simply to improve organization, and it remains very easy to scale or adapt the configuration.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Previously, I used PRTG. The main differences between PRTG and Auvik are the user interface being much easier to navigate, and Auvik being much more intuitive in indicating what it can and cannot scan, as well as what it is currently scanning. With PRTG, we had to manually select and choose what we wanted to be monitored, which required a significant amount of setup time. In contrast, I found Auvik to be much easier to set up and get running quickly.

    The previous solution lacked many features that Auvik provides. For instance, it didn't offer bandwidth or power consumption monitoring. We needed to go into specific devices and enable reporting for each one individually, like for power devices such as rack-mounted APCs or PDUs. Usually, configuring these devices requires manual intervention. Auvik automatically discovers and monitors them, allowing me to access reports directly through its interface. This information, combined with other reports like server power-down events, helps me map the order of events during a system crash. I can analyze which devices failed first and work my way back using the network map and alerts. No other tool offers such ease of use and diagnostic capabilities as Auvik's built-in features once a device is connected.

    Furthermore, Auvik provides extensive functionality for firewalls and network switches. The configuration backup feature, which was a key factor in our decision to purchase the software, is unparalleled. It securely stores configurations in the cloud, enabling quick redeployment and comparison between backup points to identify changes. Additionally, it allows for easy reversion to previous configurations if necessary.

    We encountered a scenario where an older switch in our server room lost power. Auvik notified me of this event, and the switch automatically reverted to an older firmware version. Recovering the lost firmware required redeploying a configuration file, which was readily available through Auvik. Restoring the configuration was a simple click away. This incident highlighted how Auvik goes beyond mere monitoring by actively facilitating troubleshooting.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was incredibly simple. I was brought into an onboarding meeting with just two or three others, and within a couple of weeks, I had a firm grasp of the platform. I also took advantage of the excellent training offered. 

    The integrator would answer any questions I had, but for the most part, I was directed to their knowledge base. This prompted me to take the courses they offered, including a certification for the tool. Completing these courses on my own proved to be much more efficient than waiting to schedule meetings with the integrator. Consequently, I was able to learn the tool independently.

    What about the implementation team?

    The implementation was completed in-house.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing is very good. It's extremely competitive and I've shopped around on Auvik to see if there were cheaper solutions like Traverse, and there's no comparing the pricing. No one can beat their pricing right now.

    Auvik monitors my core switches free of charge. I only pay for my firewalls.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I evaluated SolarWinds and another solution, but neither met my needs because they required extensive setup. Auvik, on the other hand, simplifies the process significantly. As a single person in my department responsible for the entire infrastructure, networking, cybersecurity, and other tasks, I rely on efficient tools. Auvik allowed me to seamlessly integrate into my new workplace and gain immediate visibility into the entire environment. Implementing the other tools would have been a much more time-consuming process. Auvik offered a smoother, faster, and easier implementation within my company.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate Auvik a nine out of ten.

    Maintenance on Auvik is only performed when we are aware of downtime. The only reason I have ever needed to perform maintenance on Auvik is to unmanage devices that are looping alerts. While troubleshooting, I may occasionally need to make changes to Auvik, but there are very few day-to-day tasks required. Once configured, Auvik requires minimal maintenance.

    For anyone evaluating Auvik, my advice is this: understand that while this tool won't fix problems on its own, it will help you diagnose and solve issues more efficiently and logically. It provides a visual representation of your network that you wouldn't normally see unless you were physically present in the server room. But with Auvik, you have this vital visibility from anywhere you have a computer. That's a major benefit in itself. Additionally, Auvik is very quick to set up and easy to deploy. You can be up and running in as little as a week, which is a significant advantage over other network monitoring solutions.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    PeerSpot user
    Jeremy Campbell - PeerSpot reviewer
    IT Manager at Seyer Industries
    Real User
    Dec 19, 2022
    Enables us to get on top of issues before they become an outage
    Pros and Cons
    • "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."
    • "When I change IP addresses on a device or on a server, I have to wait for Auvik to figure out that change. It will tell me the device is offline until Auvik scans the whole subnet again and finds it. If I change 25 devices, I'll get 50 emails in a short time because they've gone offline."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use Auvik to monitor our whole network infrastructure. It helps us keep track of issues that arise and things that go offline. We have one main corporate office here that has multiple buildings and a lot of private fiber.

    We have 68 access points, 46 switches, and 240 employees. Every person here utilizes the network on a PC, iPad, or iPhone. All of our CNC machines are on the network. That adds up to about 600 total devices on the network, including everything with an IP address. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    Auvik allows us to get on top of issues before they become an outage. It alerts us about when dropped packets on an access point get out of hand, so I know to look at that. It speeds up the remediation time for network issues by about 25% to 50%. I get a heads-up about all the potential issues in my network. 

    I don't have to worry as much about the network because I have something telling me when issues are happening, so I can be proactive. If a situation is happening, I know where to look because I've gotten emails about what's going down before the problem hits my desk.

    I know about power outages at our facilities before somebody calls me about it because Auvik sends me a report that the network at one of our facilities is offline. I can investigate and find that the power went out long enough that the battery backup for the switch gear ran out. 

    I have peace of mind because Auvik constantly records the state of the network configurations on all of my devices, and it provides one place to find everything. I don't need to waste time searching a million different settings in a million different pieces of software and endpoints. It's given me back some time. It has saved me time because I don't need to create Visio drawings of our network. That was massively time-consuming, and everybody does it differently. Nothing ever looks great, but Auvik's printout of the network map looks phenomenal.

    We don't have a global footprint, but we utilize multiple buildings. Auvik has given us a lot of visibility by allowing us to see what's going on in other buildings a lot easier. We can remotely log into networking devices through Auvik, so you don't have to manually open a window and remember the login credentials. Everything is stored inside the app on the cloud. It's easy to jump in and hit the ground running instead of trying to look up an Excel document or a OneNote with information on how to get into the device.

    We use a product called PDQ Inventory to keep track of our software inventory, but Auvik helps us manage our network inventory, letting us know what's on the network, and where it's located.

    What is most valuable?

    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 has everything I need in one place. I don't feel like I need other modules to use the product. In the past, we had about five different pieces of software, none of which did anything like what Auvik does. It provides a whole network map breaking down all the connections and ports so that you can drill down. I had nothing like that in the past that let me track everything. It has helped to see the state of my network at any time.

    I like Auvik's cloud-based solution. I prefer to have a collector that pulls all the information and sends it up to the cloud so that I can access that from basically anywhere. It's all multifactor authentication, so I don't have to worry about people hacking that. At the same time, I also love that I don't have to tie up computing resources here in my data center locally. I like that better than setting up something that collects it on-premises. Then I have to back that up somewhere. It creates a larger overhead to maintain.

    I love the network visualization because drawing the network out in Visio was becoming almost impossible because of our network's size. The ability to show a dynamic, updated view of our network has been a huge help. I enjoy that because you can drill down into visualization and focus on different segments of your network

    What needs improvement?

    When I change IP addresses on a device or on a server, I have to wait for Auvik to figure out that change. It will tell me the device is offline until Auvik scans the whole subnet again and finds it. If I change 25 devices, I'll get 50 emails in a short time because they've gone offline. 

    I'd love the ability to change that where I can update that device with the IP address without it going offline. That goes against the idea of a system that dynamically scans. It's information overload sometimes when you need to change a bunch of factors. You get inundated with emails. I would almost love a button whenever you first log in that says maintenance window, and then it would maybe take some of those alerts away.

    It's fairly intuitive but sometimes you have to search for things because it's hidden in the user interface, so I think that could be improved a little bit. The search could be better because they have these strange search terms. Instead of being able to look for what you want, you have to lay out the query in a specific way to get results.

    We've also been dealing with some weird bugs lately. We get alerts on miscellaneous items that go offline and online all the time. I've reached out to support, and they said that they've got a fix that they rolled out. However, we're still experiencing the issue, so I've got to work with them to fix that. They seem to be on top of the support.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've used Auvik for a little over a year. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Auvik is pretty stable. I often get emails about preemptive maintenance outage windows, but there's never been a time when I needed to access it but couldn't. My computer also struggles with visualization because it's a little older. I'll usually remote into another computer that handles it better.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It seems to be like they would be able to handle quite a bit, especially being cloud-based. I feel that if I had to triple or quadruple the size of my network, they would be able to handle it really well. It doesn't seem like it would be tough for them.

    How are customer service and support?

    I rate Auvik support eight out of 10. There have been times when it has been excellent. However, I still have some issues where things go offline and come back online. They reached out after the ticket to ask, "Hey, would you recommend Auvik to your colleagues?" That was the first time any company has reached out to me, so it sounds like they care about that score.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I used a free solution from a company called Spiceworks. It was a network monitoring software that listened to SNMP traffic. However, it got overloaded with the size of our network and wouldn't function how I needed it to. The alerts were out of control. It was too much for me, so I turned it off and looked for something else.

    How was the initial setup?

    We set up Auvik over a demo call, and they said they would set me up with a production-ready environment. I would have 30 days to play with it. After that, they got me into a little bit more in-depth setup. It took me and the technician 30 minutes in total. About 15 minutes after the installation, we were collecting data and setting up alerts.

    It's phenomenal how quickly Auvik was set up. It reminded me of another system that I used called Action1, a remote endpoint management solution. We installed the collector for that, and within 20 seconds, it had installed its agent on every machine with a domain login in my environment. Auvik was very similar to that. It was up and running and collecting data within minutes.

    The network map started to populate the same day. It takes a while to get most of the map worked out, but it started populating within an hour or so. My previous solutions were fairly easy to set up. Still, I never got them to work in a way that served my purpose, and I ultimately uninstalled them because the features weren't good enough to justify the amount of time it took to set them up and get them working. 

    The majority of them were free tools that I had looked at before going with Auvik. I  generally understand why they were free, which led me to the point of needing to buy a service where I had support. I need support to fall back on if I don't know what I'm doing rather than just sort of meandering through a free tool.

    Auvik doesn't require much maintenance. Suppose I'm looking for some information on why something's happening or what a device is, and I don't have any information besides spreadsheets. In that case, I go to Auvik to get an idea of that device because it has some good guesstimates based on a MAC address. 

    What was our ROI?

    We saw value almost instantly because of the visibility we get into the network. If I'm curious about why a device is dropping offline, I have a map to see what devices are offline and dig into what's going on. I can check to see the state of the network if a lot of things are going offline. We didn't have that before. We were able to get value out of it within the first week.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    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.

    It's the best monitoring software we can get at that per-device cost. They get pretty aggressive with pricing. When you add network switching that will be managed by Auvik, you'll see it on your next quarterly bill. You have to choose not to manage it whenever you install it if you don't want to be billed for it. You can keep your costs under control if you don't want to manage a device you're adding to the network.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I looked at SolarWinds. Their problem was that they had just been hacked at a pretty high level, and I didn't want anything to do with a vendor that had any hacking going on. The other one was called Netwrix. We had a demo of ManageEngine, but setting it up was like pulling teeth. I was in the middle of the demo with the people, and nothing was working right.

    With Auvik, we were up in 15 minutes after downloading the collector and getting it on the network. It started populating data without the need to provide a lot of information. It went so smoothly. That sold me on it.

    What other advice do I have?

    I rate Auvik eight out of 10. My advice would be to try the demo and kick the tires as much as possible to find out if it's the right tool for you. Annual pricing is cheaper, but I believe they do monthly licenses if you're still not. Utilize it as much as possible before signing a contract.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Other
    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    PeerSpot user
    Chief Engineer at Red1
    Real User
    Jun 2, 2024
    Is easy to deploy, consolidates data into one platform, and saves time
    Pros and Cons
    • "Auvik stands out for its ability to combine network and per-port traffic inspection with log aggregation and data flow analysis in a single platform."
    • "I've had some trouble using Auvik's device proxy, which allows technicians to connect to network devices through Auvik's platform."

    What is our primary use case?

    Our network infrastructure is monitored by Auvik Network Management. This includes firewalls and network traffic. By using Auvik, we gain data and analytics that fuel our diagnostics, alarm systems, and overall network environment insights.

    We decided to implement Auvik after struggling to find a network monitoring solution that ticked all the boxes. We needed a cost-effective option with a user-friendly interface, backed by a responsive company committed to ongoing product updates. Unfortunately, the market seemed to offer outdated, once-great products or solutions prohibitively expensive for small businesses and MSPs like us. Thankfully, our experience with Auvik has been good. Both our dedicated sales representative and the onboarding technical support team have been phenomenal.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Despite the usual setup time – an hour or two for getting things connected and entering credentials – the platform started pulling data from our devices almost immediately. It was practically instantaneous, aside from the standard management deployment time. Interestingly, the network map took a bit longer to figure itself out compared to the platform itself. The platform started showing me interface details, traffic information, and even automatically identified our WAN connections. We did have to set credentials later, and thankfully, we had backups of our devices ready beforehand, since it seemed like the platform wanted that information before the network map fully visualized everything. Overall, the deployment process was remarkably quick and easy.

    Last Sunday, I encountered an issue that the dashboard interface helped resolve quickly. I could easily locate the specific device on the map and clicking on it brought up all relevant information. This allowed us to directly investigate the problematic port, view its traffic status up or down, without the need for a more cumbersome process. Traditionally, we would have had to VPN into the network, log in to the switch using its credentials, and then identify the specific port involved. The dashboard streamlines this process, saving time frequently. While it may not be a massive improvement, it offers a noticeable efficiency gain in our mean time to resolution.

    Our company is still in the early stages of adopting Auvik, a monitoring platform that can be used for all of our customers. This means that we will eventually have one platform for all our alerts and for our technicians to access. This will simplify things internally for our company by reducing the number of platforms our technicians need to be familiar with to support our clients. It will also reduce the amount of documentation we need to maintain. With Auvik, our technicians will spend less time on maintenance and troubleshooting because they will only need to learn and use one platform. Currently, our technicians haven't started using Auvik yet, but the plan is to move away from all the various monitoring solutions we've been using for different customers and consolidate everything onto this one platform. Once our technicians are using Auvik, it will make our jobs significantly easier and faster.

    What is most valuable?

    Auvik stands out for its ability to combine network and per-port traffic inspection with log aggregation and data flow analysis in a single platform. This comprehensive approach is rare in network monitoring solutions. Even more impressive is that Auvik offers these high-end enterprise features at a cost-effective price. Traditionally, such capabilities are only found in expensive products. The combination of powerful features and affordability made Auvik a very attractive choice for us.

    What needs improvement?

    The Auvik interface has a modern look and feel in terms of its color scheme and layout. However, some elements are arranged in a way that I find counterintuitive. As a company with a web and application development team, we have a strong focus on user interface and user experience. For some features in Auvik, the placement of buttons and functionalities doesn't feel optimal. We've had to consult our representative several times on how to find specific options. For example, editing a device requires navigating through the sidebar to a specific category and tab, then selecting the device, line item, and checking a box before finally reaching the edit button. Additionally, the placement of buttons seems inconsistent across different sections, making the overall workflow less intuitive and requiring more training to become proficient.

    My ideal real-time network monitoring would involve seeing all my data at once, including connection speeds and throughput. While Auvik's automated network map is visually appealing and generally accurate compared to competitors, it lacks some key features. For example, unlike a competitor's recent feature that shows traffic between trunk connections, Auvik only displays a single color for connection links, indicating wired or wireless status. This doesn't provide vital information like link speed or potential problems. Additionally, connections with momentary issues simply disappear from the map, which is frustrating. Auvik could integrate valuable alerts and insights from other parts of the platform directly onto the map. This would highlight potential issues with specific devices and their connections. While I acknowledge ongoing development efforts, there's still a significant gap in desired features. Another limitation is the lack of manual map editing. For instance, our server has multiple Ethernet connections entering a single switch, but the map erroneously shows them spread throughout the building. With no way to manually adjust this, the map's accuracy suffers. While Auvik's map is aesthetically pleasing, I wouldn't rely on it for complete accuracy.

    I've had some trouble using Auvik's device proxy, which allows technicians to connect to network devices through Auvik's platform. The Mac software I need isn't fully functional yet, so I might be doing something wrong, but other products like Domotz work flawlessly. One of the main reasons we chose Auvik was to eliminate the need for VPNs, on-site PCs, or network tunnels for technicians to access devices. This would reduce our equipment costs. While the pricing is fair overall, the jump between plans is significant. For instance, their higher plan offers features like NetFlow statistics and analytics for firewalls, which require more data and rightfully cost more. However, the entire client site is included in that plan, and there's no option to pay extra for specific devices. I'd be happy to pay more for those features on select devices, but the current pricing structure prevents me from getting them. This seems like a missed opportunity for both Auvik and us. Not all my devices need the extensive logging and data collection offered in the higher plan. Network switches and access points, for example, have their own controllers that handle SysLogging, so I wouldn't need Auvik for that. However, I would like to pay extra for those features on our firewalls and routers. In the current situation, neither side benefits. If we pay for the higher plan, our costs increases, which will eventually impact our customers' prices. However, convincing customers to pay for this one additional feature within the entire monitoring platform is difficult.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Auvik Network Management for one year.

    How are customer service and support?

    Throughout this process, I've primarily relied on my representative for assistance. While I haven't directly contacted their technical support line, my representative has involved them on my behalf. This may be a slight deviation from the usual procedure, but it has still allowed me to reach the appropriate people.

    The technical support team has been very responsive in identifying and resolving any technical issues I've encountered. They were able to quickly understand the situation with minimal questions. Additionally, I appreciate the granular control I have over their access to client data. I can grant them temporary or read-only access, which allows for collaborative troubleshooting without compromising security or hindering our learning experience.

    Overall, I've been very impressed with the technical support team's knowledge. We understand they aren't responsible for diagnosing internal network issues; their focus is on supporting their platform and ensuring our connection to network devices. So far, their responsiveness has been excellent.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Prior to implementing Auvik, we experimented with a number of network management solutions. These included PRTG, Domotz, LibreNMS, and the built-in NinjaOne option. We also evaluated SolarWinds. We've explored a wide range of options. Our goal is to find a standardized solution, and we believe Auvik fits the bill. PRTG was expensive so we could only use the free version that only allowed for 1,000 sensors, proving too restrictive for our needs. LibreNMS required a high level of technical expertise for deployment and maintenance, which wasn't feasible for all our technicians. SolarWinds simply didn't meet all our requirements. While NinjaOne is still in active development. We may revisit it in the future. Overall, Auvik strikes the perfect balance between functionality, ease of use, and scalability.

    How was the initial setup?

    The deployment of Auvik requires installing an agent and some information. The deployment took around one hour. 

    Although Auvik is a cloud-based solution, it requires software installation on a computer or server within our network. This initial process can be cumbersome. In our experience, the provided API key wasn't functional, and creating separate API keys isn't an option. Instead, we need to create full user accounts, which feels unnecessarily complex.

    Once the connector is installed, the user interface presents challenges. Management credentials and network scanning configurations are located in separate areas. While the deployment section attempts to consolidate these settings, it becomes irrelevant after the initial setup. Ideally, the interface should streamline the initial configuration process, instead of requiring users to navigate through various menus.

    Another concern is the requirement for generic credentials. Instead of specifying credentials for each device, we must provide generic ones that are simply tested for functionality. This raises security concerns. These generic credentials are tested against various devices in our environment, even those for which they are not intended. While we trust our security measures, a compromised device could potentially allow the Auvik connector to expose these credentials to unauthorized devices. Ideally, the system should allow for specifying credentials on a per-device basis, eliminating the need for generic credentials and the associated security risks.

    What about the implementation team?

    The implementation was completed in-house.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I came to a surprising realization about Auvik's pricing. It turns out they only charge for routers and switches! This means all our access points, security cameras, camera servers, and other infrastructure are monitored for free. While the client understandably wanted the server on-site, most other devices are a bonus. This is a huge advantage – with a typical network, we might have one firewall, three switches, and 60-70 access points. With Auvik, we only pay for the four core devices, bringing the cost down significantly. In my opinion, Auvik could advertise this benefit more clearly. Many other platforms charge for every device, so Auvik's free monitoring for a large portion of the network is a game-changer. It not only helped us make the decision but also benefits non-profits we support. The fact that they're confident enough in their platform to offer this makes Auvik a truly valuable and supportive solution.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    In the end, we were deciding between Domotz and Auvik. Auvik's initial pricing structure was a concern. Their tiered system required a minimum number of devices per tier to get a reasonable price. While their desire to be profitable is understandable, this presented a hurdle for us. However, Auvik impressed us with their willingness to work with us. They emphasized that they wouldn't lose a customer solely on price, as long as open communication existed. This flexibility in finding a solution was a major factor in our decision. Another reason we chose Auvik was the user interface and user experience. We found Auvik's interface to be superior to Domotz's. Additionally, Auvik's pricing based on individual devices, rather than NetFlow, was a significant advantage. This meant we wouldn't be penalized for devices with minimal traffic or high port counts. From a business standpoint, this eliminated the need to constantly monitor billing for small variations in device usage. With Auvik, we pay a fixed cost per device and receive all the necessary features, regardless of its size or complexity. Consistent and predictable billing was another key consideration in our choice.

    What other advice do I have?

    Auvik Network Management gets a solid eight out of ten from me. While the network maps and user interface could be improved, the software delivers exactly what we need out of the box. It connected to our devices seamlessly and provided valuable analytics data and information logging. The setup process was straightforward, and the learning curve wasn't steep.

    We're currently in the early stages of implementing Auvik, which means our existing software is still operational. To ensure a smooth transition, we typically allow a three-to-four-month overlap period for new software before fully integrating it into production. While I've been the primary user so far and can provide initial insights, our help desk technicians haven't yet been granted access to Auvik.

    There is a minimal amount of maintenance required, primarily for alerts. The default settings include alerts for all devices, but not all of them are relevant to our needs. We simply need to adjust these defaults. Aside from that, the system is truly "set it and forget it." It will notify us of any problems, and as an IT company, we have internal procedures to log in and investigate any alerts. However, there is no ongoing maintenance required after the initial installation.

    Setting up Auvik is smoothest when your network devices are already configured for SNMP. If you're unsure about your equipment's SNMP settings or lack a configuration altogether, take some time to familiarize yourself with your devices before proceeding. Having your device credentials readily available will also expedite the process. As long as both SNMP logging and credentials are prepared, Auvik deployment becomes a breeze. However, investing a few minutes to learn the Auvik interface beforehand will pay off in the long run. A grasp of the interface will make Auvik exceptionally user-friendly and position it as a powerful and functional solution for your needs.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Auvik Network Management (ANM) Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: October 2026
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Auvik Network Management (ANM) Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.