Arista NDR vs Auvik Network Management (ANM) comparison

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

We performed a comparison between Arista NDR and Auvik Network Management (ANM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM) Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Arista NDR's scalability is very good, making it easy to add more hardware components. You can order additional hardware and integrate it by stacking it with the existing setup. This feature cannot be seen in other NDR tools.""It gives us something that is almost like an auditing tool for all of our network controls, to see how they are performing. This is related to compliance so that we can see how we are doing with what we have already implemented. There are things that we implemented, but we really didn't know if they were working or not. We have that visibility now.""The query language makes it easy to query the records on the network, to do searches for the various threat activities that we're looking for. The dashboard, the Security Knowledge Graph, displays information meaningfully and easily. I am able to find the information that I want to find pretty quickly.""This solution help us monitor devices used on our network by insiders, contractors, partners, or suppliers. Its correlation and identification of specific endpoints is very good, especially since we have a large, virtualized environment. It discerns this fairly well. Some of the issues that we have had with other tools is we sometimes are not able to tell the difference between users on some of those virtualized instances.""The query language that they have is quite valuable, especially because the sensor itself is storing some network activity and we're able to query that. That has been useful in a pinch because we don't necessarily use it just for threat hunting, but we also use it for debugging network issues. We can use it to ask questions and get answers about our network. For example: Which users and devices are using the VPN for RDP access? We can write a query pretty quickly and get an answer for that.""We appreciate the value of the AML (structured query language). We receive security intel feeds for a specific type of malware or ransomware. AML queries looking for the activity is applied in almost real-time. Ultimately, this determines if the activity was not observed on the network.""Other solutions will say, "Hey, this device is doing something weird." But they don't aggregate that data point with other data points. With Awake you have what's called a "fact pattern." For example, if there's a smart toaster on the third floor that is beaconing out to an IP address in North Korea, sure that's bizarre. But if that toaster was made in North Korea it's not bizarre. Taking those two data points together, and automating something using machine-learning is something that no other solution is doing right now.""The most valuable portion is that they offer a threat-hunting service. Using their platform, and all of the data that they're collecting, they actually help us be proactive by having really expert folks that have insight, not just into our accounts, but into other accounts as well. They can be proactive and say, 'Well, we saw this incident at some other customer. We ran that same kind of analysis for you and we didn't see that type of activity in your network.'"

More Arista NDR Pros →

"I love that Auvik can automatically back up the configuration of switches and firewalls.""Auvik allows me to filter by network elements, so I can get a quick glance at a customer's infrastructure without looking through handmade diagrams. It provides me with an overview of how everything is laid out. From there, I can really drill down into individual inventories and switch ports. For example, I can determine what the issue is, but I don't need to be on the premises and log into customer equipment. It saves a lot of time.""The cloud monitoring portion of Auvik that provides visibility into each piece of my infrastructure is the most valuable feature.""The extensive personalization and customization options are great because it lets me do a lot. I can set up different permission structures, assign various staff members read-only access and others full access, and customize my notifications.""The topography and historical data are excellent; the latter essentially allows us to see back in time, which is helpful as users don't always report issues promptly. The ability to go back and look at historical data is a good feature.""Auvik is easy to use. It took some time to set it up, and they were pretty good to us. They offered us around six sessions with a technician to help us set up the monitors we wanted. After we were trained properly, I had no issues using it.""Shadow IT monitoring is huge for us since so many of our customers are highly regulated.""The network monitoring and backups of specific devices are really impressive. We've seen very good responses from our staff regarding the backup functionality. You can add a product, such as a switch and, once the product is added, it backs it up for you."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pros →

Cons
"I enjoy the query language, but it could be a bit more user-friendly, especially for new users who come across it... They should push it more into a natural language style as opposed to a query language.""They've been focused on really developing their data science, their ability to detect, but over time, they need to be able to tie into other systems because other systems might detect something that they don't.""When I looked at the competitors, such as Darktrace, they all have prettier interfaces. If Awake could make it a little more user-friendly, that would go a long way.""While the appliance is very good, and I think they're working on it, it would probably help if they integrated the management team cases into the appliance so that everything we are working on with them would be accessible on our platform, on the dashboard, on the portal. Right now, Awake is just an additional team that uses the appliance that we use and then we communicate with them directly. Communication isn't through the portal.""I would like to see a bit more in terms of encrypted traffic. With the advent of programs that live off the land, a smart attacker is going to leverage encryption to execute their operation. So I would like to see improvements there, where possible. Currently, we're not going to be decrypting encrypted traffic. What other approaches could be used?""One concern I do have with Awake is that, ideally, it should be able identify high-risk users and devices and entities. However, we don't have confidence in their entity resolution, and we've provided this feedback to Awake. My understanding is that this is where some of the AI/ML is, and it hasn't been reliable in correctly identifying which device an activity is associated with. We have also encountered issues where it has merged two devices into one entity profile when they shouldn't be merged. The entity resolution is the weakest point of Awake so far.""Awake Security needs to move to a 24/7 support model in the MNDR space. Once they do that, it will make them even better.""The one thing that the Awake platform lacks is the ability to automate the ingestion of IOCs rather than having to import CSV files or JSON files manually."

More Arista NDR Cons →

"I wish there was a way to reduce the cost somehow.""Getting remotely connected to managed devices could be a little bit smoother. Sometimes, it's a little bit cumbersome trying to do that. If they could streamline the facilitating of remote connections to network devices, that would be an improvement.""Configuring alerts is pretty tedious. It would be nice if they had a wizard who walked you through instead of having everything turned on or off from the start.""The solution can improve by increasing the tech file management capability.""The ability to subcategorize our inventories, between physical and VM servers, for example, would be a welcome addition.""Price sensitivity is an issue in the country where we use Auvik because of our exchange rate. It would be helpful if they could offer a slightly more affordable price in this region. I'd also like to see Auvik introduce more AI-driven features.""I want to see improvements to the interface, as it's data-heavy and challenging to navigate. This makes it harder to delegate and have junior staff look around and figure out the solution. A more straightforward interface would be a welcome improvement, whether by making it cleaner or more intuitive.""If I am an administrator, then I have to maintain, clean, and label that environment. Auvik's utility in that regard is cumbersome. It is hard to find where certain things are configured. Also, it is sometimes hard to figure out why Auvik is doing what it is doing."

More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The solution has saved thousands of dollars within the first day. Our ROI has to be in the tens of thousands of dollars since October last year."
  • "Awake Security was the least expensive among their competitors. Everyone was within $15,000 of each other. The other solutions were not providing the MNDR service, which is standard with Awake Security's pricing/licensing model."
  • "We switched to Awake Security because they were able to offer a model that was significantly less expensive and the value that we get out of it is higher."
  • "The solution is very good and the pricing is also better than others..."
  • "The pricing seems pretty reasonable for what we get out of it. We also found it to be more competitive than some other vendors that we've looked at."
  • "Awake's pricing was very competitive. It's not a cheap option though. It's an investment to utilize it, but it's one that we decided was worth the cost, with the managed services. At our scale, it was a much better option to utilize their software and their managed services to handle this, rather than hiring another person to be an analyst. It was quite cost-effective for us."
  • "Because I represent a hedge fund, I have some leverage. I told them that they had to meet my conditions if they wanted me as a client. It was the same way with Awake. They wanted an initial four-year agreement. Initially, we signed on for a one-year contract, but they wanted the four-year deal when it came time for the renewal. I told them that I was not doing that. I said that they either had to do it on my terms, or I'd go somewhere else."
  • More Arista NDR Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Compared to other products, Auvik's pricing is more feasible since you get all its features. You pay for licenses on a per network device basis. It monitors hypervisors, but does not bill for that. There are no additional costs, which is something that I like."
  • "The pricing is fair for the value and time saved that you get out of it. The larger you go, the more sense it makes per device, because as you hit different pricing tiers, it becomes much more affordable per device."
  • "Its pricing is a little on the high end. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. It is more expensive than other solutions, but their per-device model is very fair. Anything other than the networking gear is monitored by Auvik at no charge."
  • "The value is there. It's not that expensive per device and it's licensed per device. Unlike some of the other tools that I use, it's not real expensive. It's a good value for the price."
  • "It's great for small businesses, but when you start reviewing the pricing model, depending on how many devices, and what sub-devices you decide to pull in, it can get tricky as far as the pricing goes."
  • "As an individual IP company, Auvik is a little bit pricey. It is a little expensive, but as an MSP owner, I have a small side business. So, I'm an Auvik customer in that sense too. In that, I think it's reasonable to pay $10 to $15 a device or less depending on the endpoint. For the amount of capability that it has, it is very reasonably priced."
  • "Its pricing is very reasonable. We had looked at other solutions where you pay based on the amount of traffic that was filtered through and analyzed. With Auvik, we pay by a billable device. We're not paying based on every single device we have. For one of the locations I have, one network element would likely be a billable device. So, every billable device has a network element, but not every network element is a billable device. If I have a location that has 50 network elements, then maybe 30 of them are billable devices. PCs, VoIP phones, and access points are monitored at no charge."
  • "The cost for all the devices that we were billed at in my last job was about $2500 annually. It wasn't much. It has the most reasonable pricing as compared to any product out there. I can't complain. It is amazing. It allows me to bundle inside the package what I charge customers per user per month. I don't charge them per device anymore. That's not how we do things in the industry. It is per user per month. The way Auvik is charging us allows me to do it. For example, if they charge $250 for a certain number of seats, I'm just going to write the costs onto per user per month. I have a few leftover licenses to use, which allows me to go out and make some more sales and give some freebies at some shows. So, it makes me very flexible. I am very happy with it. It is billed by network devices. You could choose which billable device you want. What is really nice is that if you don't want one switch to be billable and the other one to be billable, you can do that. You just won't have the features that the billable switch has, which isn't horrible. Sometimes, you don't need that. What I'm really happy about is that Auvik doesn't force things on you and doesn't say, "You have to have all of this," and that's a great business model."
  • More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Arista NDR's scalability is very good, making it easy to add more hardware components. You can order additional hardware and integrate it by stacking it with the existing setup. This feature cannot be… more »
    Top Answer:The tool's pricing is expensive but it is competitive.
    Top Answer:Arista NDR needs to open legal offices to be closer to customers and partners. It needs more visibility in the NDR market in the Middle East. While they are doing well, they lack sufficient engineers… more »
    Top Answer:Auvik offers free monitoring for all devices except routers and firewalls. This includes devices like network-attached devices, PCs, and printers, making it cost-effective for monitoring a wide range… more »
    Top Answer:I find Auvik's pricing to be a good value for the features offered. With the professional plan costing around $15.30 per month per device, it is affordable, considering you only pay for active devices… more »
    Top Answer:In terms of improvement, while the network map and dashboards are generally easy to use, the NetFlow app can be a bit compressed and difficult to customize for better readability.
    Ranking
    Views
    2,230
    Comparisons
    1,293
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    392
    Rating
    9.0
    Views
    791
    Comparisons
    184
    Reviews
    100
    Average Words per Review
    1,347
    Rating
    8.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Awake Security Platform
    Learn More
    Overview

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

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

    The 5 Levels of Autonomous Security paper

    Auvik is a network management software that provides real-time visibility and control over network infrastructure. 

    It automates network mapping, monitoring, and troubleshooting, allowing IT teams to easily identify and resolve issues. 

    With its intuitive interface and powerful features, Auvik helps businesses optimize their network performance and ensure smooth operations.

    Offer
    Identify hidden network threats


    Your network may have security risks that you don't know about. Schedule a live demo to see how you can use Awake Security to identify and mitigate these threats.

    Learn more about Auvik Network Management (ANM)
    Sample Customers
    - Dolby Laboratories- Seattle Genetics- ARM Energy- Ooma- Prophix- Yapstone
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Insurance Company18%
    Legal Firm9%
    Pharma/Biotech Company9%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company15%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Educational Organization8%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company35%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Retailer7%
    Government7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Construction Company12%
    Educational Organization8%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business31%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise54%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise63%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business70%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business44%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise44%
    Buyer's Guide
    Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM)
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM) and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Arista NDR is ranked 8th in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) with 14 reviews while Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) with 131 reviews. Arista NDR is rated 9.0, while Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Arista NDR writes "Gives us network layer visibility into things that may not be covered by other monitoring tools, such as shadow IT". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Auvik Network Management (ANM) writes "Enables us to get on top of issues before they become an outage". Arista NDR is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Vectra AI, Trend Micro Deep Discovery, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Darktrace, whereas Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, Meraki Dashboard, SolarWinds NPM and Zabbix. See our Arista NDR vs. Auvik Network Management (ANM) report.

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

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