Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs Kaseya Traverse comparison

Cisco and Kaseya are both solutions in the Network Monitoring Software category. Cisco is ranked #43 with an average rating of 8.0, while Kaseya is ranked #58 with an average rating of 8.0. Cisco holds a 0.7% mindshare in NMS, compared to Kaseya’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of Kaseya users who would recommend it.

Cisco Provider Connectivity...

Read 24 Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance reviews

2,574 Views
1,596 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Kaseya Traverse

Read 8 Kaseya Traverse reviews

961 Views
788 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Cisco Provider Connectivity...

Kaseya Traverse

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Kaseya Traverse and Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance compete in network monitoring. Kaseya Traverse holds an advantage in pricing and support, while Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance leads with advanced features.

Features: Kaseya Traverse provides predictive analytics, seamless integrations, and strong vendor support. Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance offers connectivity checks, assurance features, and automated workflows.

Room for Improvement: Kaseya Traverse could enhance scalability, add more advanced features, and improve its analytics capabilities. Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance might shorten deployment time, simplify user interface, and lower integration costs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kaseya Traverse is known for straightforward deployment and responsive support. Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance features a more complex deployment process, backed by thorough documentation and an expert support team.

Pricing and ROI: Kaseya Traverse offers competitive pricing with lower setup costs and predictable ROI. Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance requires a higher upfront investment, providing potential for long-term value with its connectivity capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs. Kaseya Traverse Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs. Kaseya Traverse

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,711 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

Cisco Provider Connectivity...

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

43rd

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (43rd)

Kaseya Traverse

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

58th

Average Rating

6.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Monitoring Software (35th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance is 0.7%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaseya Traverse is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance	0.7%
Kaseya Traverse	0.5%
Other	98.8%

Network Monitoring Software

Featured Reviews

Sylvain Germe

Application and Network Performance Engineer at a tech services company with 1-10 employees

Highly scalable, responsive support, but lacking new features

This solution is geared towards on-premise setups, and would not be useful if the company plans to move to the cloud within the next two years, such as Google Cloud for example. If the goal is to monitor bandwidth at remote sites and identify performance issues because the network is under the control, this solution is useful. However, if a company primarily uses cloud-based servers and does not manage the internet connection of its remote sites, the solution becomes less useful. I rate Accedian Skylight a seven out of ten. I have a positive opinion of the tool, but it can be challenging to set up. It is also limited in its applicability to certain use cases. I am familiar with the engineers behind the solution and have a good impression of them. However, I am not pleased with the fact that the company removed many features and raised prices after it was acquired by Accedian.

Read full review

AMMAR HUMAIDY HUSIN

Technical Consultant at a university with 11-50 employees

Automation increases efficiency, but pricing needs to be more competitive

Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpful for me as a customer. The issue always is the price, as we cannot beat most of our competitors on pricing alone. If a product is just nice to have, not essential like an antivirus, if it's not really competitive with pricing, we cannot sell it.

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

"One valuable feature we have is real-time monitoring for connection issues."

"The ability to measure performance end-to-end across the cloud data center allows us to take corrective action to keep our channels online."

"The feature I used to like the most was its ability to decode layer seven protocols, although this is becoming less useful now that encryption is so widespread."

"I always have the Skylight dashboard on one of my screens... Now you can create your own dashboard, specific to an application, specific to a server, or to something else."

"I think the analytics features are okay. My customer also likes the interface, the GUI, because it's easy to operate."

"What I like most about Accedian Skylight is that it's a UI application, so using it is easy. I also like that the support for Accedian Skylight is helpful."

"The performance of Accedian Skylight is better than other vendors."

"One valuable feature we have is real-time monitoring for connection issues."

More Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance pros

"Most of the features are pretty good and the solution is user friendly."

"The remote support and data collection features are great."

"We have found the solution to be very flexible to our requirements. We have been able to configure it on-premise effectively when we were using less of the cloud."

"Automating processes is crucial for me, so the automation part stands out."

"It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution."

"Kaseya Traverse is a very stable solution and very sustainable in terms of what the market wants, what is out there, price-wise and functionality features. They're quite competitive and they are always innovating."

"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."

"If I want to automate the management and maintenance of my server automatically, this product is a good use case for that."

More Kaseya Traverse pros

Cons

"The UI interface of Accedian Skylight could improve."

"Some of the Skylight applications are a little newer, and they're still moving through initial revs. There are certain bugs, but nothing is insurmountable... It will just take a little bit of time for their user interface to get a little bit better."

"If you want a new version, you go to the website. The hardest part is finding the link, where is that .bin file? Sometimes it's pretty hidden in a document... it's hidden in the release notes or in another file somewhere. And it's usually not on the first page either."

"This solution is expensive compared to some others."

"For the PVX, they are in the process of getting the results to export to cloud and SaaS for analytics. They told me that this will happen later this year. Right now, for the most part, I create that data myself."

"There should be an option to update and upgrade the solution to the new version without having to re-buy it. I have clients switching to other solutions. The old solution is great, but if you change your license to a new one, you have to almost re-buy it completely."

"The Accedian Skylight user interface still has room for improvement."

"I would like to see some improvements in parts of their synthetic transactions, which includes all the latency, jitter, and throughput. I would like to see some Layer 7 analytics in there. I want to be able to do a DNS request, HTTP GET request, or even SIP call point-to-point or via registration."

More Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance cons

"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."

"We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product."

"However, the issue lies in the adequacy of the responses to my questions, which are usually not up to par."

"Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us."

"Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also."

"Improvement is needed in making it cheaper."

"Reporting is a bit difficult."

"Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect."

More Kaseya Traverse cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is competitive overall, depending on the type of customer."

"If you look into Riverbed, it's a licensing nightmare. You need to pay for every type of analysis... If you don't look into licensing, Riverbed and SolarWinds are pretty comparable. But if you look into licensing it would not be smart to go for either of them. On the pure, bare-metal basis, it's the same. But when you get the bare metal and a few basic licenses, then you need all those other licenses just to be sure that there's no issue... One of the great things about Skylight is you have them all, and you actually need them all."

"Pricing is a little bit expensive."

"The solution was previously well-regarded, but after being acquired by Accedian, the prices have significantly increased. This has made it challenging to sell the product due to its high cost. It is an expensive solution."

"The pricing is cheaper than other competing products, which is better for our budgets."

"We understand there's a significant cost difference, but have yet to investigate fully."

"It's not for free, clearly. But on the other hand, it offers very interesting functionality. We pay around €100,000."

"The pricing of Accedian Skylight is really good. The sensors are low cost. Their model to analytics for sensors is by license, endpoint, or session. With the probes for their analytics, if they get deployed virtually, they are free. The licensing is only based on flows. So, you can effectively deploy probes everywhere in your network. Then, if you want to look at a specific type of traffic, you can enter into it with a very low cost license. You can just use things like spam ports, mirrors, TAPs, and aggregators to optimize what sort of traffic you send to these analysis tools. Then, if you want to start looking at more, you can up your licensed as you go. You are not getting forced into expensive appliances or subscription models."

More Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance pricing and cost advice

"The price depends on whether you are monitoring different applications, especially in bulk, and depends on what you're doing. If you're monitoring one endpoint, it will cost you 150 ZAR."

"The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

27%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Government

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	9

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Large Enterprise	7

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Accedian Skylight?

Human resource costs can be high when dealing with connection issues. I require more tools to file and resolve these issues efficiently.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Accedian Skylight?

I had prepared for COC and the client. I work as a vendor for a client using Flow Mount for network performance monitoring. I focus on resolving client-side issues related to Packy Performance and ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Accedian Skylight?

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

See all answers

What do you like most about Kaseya Traverse?

The remote support and data collection features are great.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaseya Traverse?

The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive. We pay an annual license fee. There are no additional fees associated with the product.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Kaseya Traverse?

See all answers

Comparisons

ThousandEyes vs Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance

Compared 17% of the time

Dynatrace vs Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance

Compared 7% of the time

Zabbix vs Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance

Compared 7% of the time

LiveNX vs Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance

Compared 6% of the time

NETSCOUT nGeniusONE vs Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance

Compared 5% of the time

More Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance Competitors

PRTG Network Monitor vs Kaseya Traverse

Compared 23% of the time

Pico Corvil Analytics vs Kaseya Traverse

Compared 19% of the time

SolarWinds NPM vs Kaseya Traverse

Compared 18% of the time

DX Performance Management vs Kaseya Traverse

Compared 14% of the time

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs Kaseya Traverse

Compared 14% of the time

More Kaseya Traverse Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance

January 2026

Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance report

Download Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance product report

Buyer's Guide

Kaseya Traverse

December 2025

Download Kaseya Traverse product report

Also Known As

Accedian Skylight, Accedian SkyLIGHT PVX, SkyLIGHT PVX, SecurActive, Performance Vision

No data available

Overview

Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance is known for its user-friendly approach to network analysis and performance monitoring. It excels in real-time diagnostics, helping organizations quickly resolve network issues and optimize performance effortlessly.

Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance focuses on comprehensive network troubleshooting and performance monitoring, assisting in identifying bottlenecks and analyzing applications. Real-time data collection and evaluation ensure IT infrastructure efficiency. With active monitoring of latency, jitter, and throughput, users maintain smooth operations across multiple sites and applications. While highly effective, improvements in data handling, protocol support, and dashboard aesthetics are suggested to enhance user experience.

What are the key features of Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance?

Flow Matrices: Advanced analysis of network paths and traffic distribution.
SQL and DNS Analysis: In-depth insights into database and domain queries for troubleshooting.
Bandwidth Assessment: Evaluation of network capacity and utilization for performance optimization.
Real-time TWAMP Monitoring: Tracks network performance using Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol.
Application Performance Modules: Monitors the performance of various applications and services.
Customizable Dashboards: Personalized views for tracking critical network metrics and trends.
PCAP Capturing: Detailed packet analysis using tools like Wireshark for deeper insights.

What benefits and ROI should users look for in reviews?

Ease of Use: Intuitive design allowing users to swiftly diagnose network issues.
Comprehensive Monitoring: Enhanced visibility of network activity for better control.
Performance Efficiency: Optimization of throughput, reducing downtimes and improving service delivery.
Cost-Effectiveness: Balances features and functionality with competitive pricing for better ROI.

In industries such as telecommunications and finance, where network reliability is crucial, Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance offers critical network performance insights. It supports high-demand environments by providing data-driven decisions, ensuring infrastructures handle increased loads efficiently.

Cisco

Immediately identify impacted IT services using insights based on rich data analytics of events such as SNMP traps, Windows events and Syslogs. Resolve faults quickly via NetFlow enabled root cause analysis across cloud, on-premise, hybrid cloud and virtualized IT environments.

Kaseya

Sample Customers

T-Systems, Thomson Reuters, Bordeaux Metropole, CGI, Citadelle Regional Hospital Center, Lorraine Institute of Oncology, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Groupe BPCE, Group S, Splitpoint, Horus-Net, Audatex, Indexis, Province de Liège, EASI, Spie Batignolles, Faymonville

UltiSat, Clear Concepts, nVidia, United States Postal Service, Cisco, Redbox, Spark Digital, People's Bank & Trust

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs. Kaseya Traverse

December 2025

Free Report: Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs. Kaseya Traverse

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs. Kaseya Traverse and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cisco Provider Connectivity Assurance vs. Kaseya Traverse report.

See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.

We monitor all Network Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.