Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Arista NDR vs Lumu comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Arista NDR
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
10th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (7th)
Lumu
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
6th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (11th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Network Detection and Response (NDR) category, the mindshare of Arista NDR is 4.1%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Lumu is 3.8%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Detection and Response (NDR)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1719513 - PeerSpot reviewer
it's much easier to create your own queries and hunt for threats
We take in IOCs from my SOC and from AlienVault, and then we focus on traffic that hits IOCs and alerts us to it. The one thing that the Awake platform lacks is the ability to automate the ingestion of IOCs rather than having to import CSV files or JSON files manually. Awake didn't support the manual importation of CSV and JSON in version 3.0, but they added it in version 4.0. It's helpful, but it still has to be a specific CSV format. Automated IOCs are on the roadmap. Hopefully, they will be able to automate the ingestion of IOCs by Q1 next year. I'm currently leveraging Mind Meld, an open-source tool by Palo Alto, to ingest IOCs from external parties. I aggregate those lists and spit them out as a massive list of domains, hashes, file names, IPS. Then we aggregate those into their own specific categories, like a URL category. Awake ingests that just like the Palo Alto firewall does, and then it alerts me if traffic attempts to go into it. Some of that is already on the Palo Alto firewall, which blocks it, but that doesn't mean that there is no attempted communication. I want to know if there's a communication attempt because there might be an indicator on that specific device trying to reach an IOC. Yes, my Palo Alto blocked it, but there's still something odd sitting there, and what if it can reach a different IOC that I don't have information about? I want to focus on it. I could do that by leveraging Awake if it could ingest the IOCs automatically. That's something I leverage Awake for today. I still have to manually import it, which is cumbersome because I have to manipulate the files that I get from the different IOC providers into a specific format that it understands. Once they add the ability to automate that, it'll be more useful.
Juan Solano - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects against threats and handles it in time with moderate pricing
Mostly, Lumu is an automatic tool. We'll deploy on firewalls and DNS servers. Lumu detects every attack on our network. The other day, we had CLC, the command controller, and the tool reacted automatically. It detected the attack and immediately blocked it without intervention from my team. The improvement is in the security process, as it's now entirely automated. We no longer require a technician or engineer to monitor our network 24/7. Lumu updates with AI and global threat intelligence, which greatly assists us. Since our workload is lighter, Lumu handles all of our tasks. We're using FortiGate for the firewall and Kaspersky for endpoints. If you are going to Lumu, you need another solution for the endpoint. You need to integrate with other tools like firewalls or another antivirus. I recommend the solution based on the price, usability, and service offered by the solution. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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.'"
"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."
"When I create a workbench query in Awake to do threat hunting, it's much easier to query. You get a dictionary popup immediately when you try to type a new query. It says, "You want to search for a device?" Then you type in "D-E," and it gives you a list of commands, like device, data set behavior, etc. That gives you the ability to build your own query."
"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."
"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 most valuable feature is the ability to see suspicious activity for devices inside my network. It helps me to quickly identify that activity and do analysis to see if it's expected or I need to mitigate that activity quickly."
"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."
"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."
"I like Lumu's simple user interface. When we deployed it, we got full access, allowing us to identify IP addresses on the network and connect machine names to users. It helped us identify and block threats via the firewall. I also appreciate the chat support and ticket closure process. We're currently reviewing network detection solutions, and my recommendations include Lumu, Sentinel, and a few others. Regarding functionality and user-friendliness, I would recommend Lumu over the others."
"Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time."
"It's been helpful for overall extended network visibility."
"The automated response to incidents works effectively out of the box, and the number of interfaces and platforms it can work with is impressive."
"You can access external links, playbooks, MITRE Matrix, and a lot of information."
"Most of it is automated, so I do not have to watch it to get alerts."
"The tool's support team helps partners resolve any problems with the product."
"The context provided by the tool is very complete, it includes the miter matrix, playbooks, links, hashes, and much more."
 

Cons

"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."
"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?"
"There's room for improvement with some of the definitions, because I don't have time and I'm not a Tier 4 analyst. I believe that is something they're working towards."
"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."
"Be prepared to update your SOPs to have your analysts work in another tool separately. There are some limitations in the integrations right now. One of the things that I want from a security standpoint is integration with multiple tools so I don't need to have my analysts logging into each individual tool."
"While the appliance is very good, and I think they're working on it, it would probably help if they integrated the management team cases into the appliance so that everything we are working on with them would be accessible on our platform, on the dashboard, on the portal. Right now, Awake is just an additional team that uses the appliance that we use and then we communicate with them directly. Communication isn't through the portal."
"Awake Security needs to move to a 24/7 support model in the MNDR space. Once they do that, it will make them even better."
"One thing I would like to see is a little bit more education or experience on AWS cloud for their managed services team. We've explained how we have the information set up, that the traffic coming in goes to the AWS load balancer and then gets sent on to our internal servers... but when I get notices they always tell me this traffic is coming from the IPs belonging to the load balancers, not the source IPs. So a little bit more education for their team about how AWS manages the traffic might help out."
"The free version is minimal compared to the full version."
"I am happy with the current features. However, one important one is to improve the reports."
"Having a larger support network would be beneficial. Nobody I know has heard of Lumu, so they are in the same space as Darktrace or CrowdStrike, but people give blank stares."
"It would be good if we could access the physical logs."
"Lumu's ability to discover threats is an area of concern where improvements are needed."
"The integration with different vendors and endpoints could be improved."
"Nothing so far needs to be improved."
"The reports need improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The solution is very good and the pricing is also better than others..."
"The solution has saved thousands of dollars within the first day. Our ROI has to be in the tens of thousands of dollars since October last year."
"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."
"We switched to Awake Security because they were able to offer a model that was significantly less expensive and the value that we get out of it is higher."
"The pricing 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."
"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."
"Compared to Lumu, other solutions are more expensive. SentinelOne was a bit cheaper, and another provider's price structure is unclear, but Lumu fit our budget nicely. SentinelOne's cost depends on the number of devices, and it might be similar to Lumu's, depending on deployment."
"The tool is available at a good price. The tool offers a good and competitive price for customers."
"It is the cheapest solution we found."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Detection and Response (NDR) solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Educational Organization
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Arista NDR?
Arista NDR's scalability is very good, making it easy to add more hardware components. You can order additional hardware and integrate it by stacking it with the existing setup. This feature cannot...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Arista NDR?
The tool's pricing is expensive but it is competitive.
What needs improvement with Arista NDR?
Arista NDR needs to open legal offices to be closer to customers and partners. It needs more visibility in the NDR market in the Middle East. While they are doing well, they lack sufficient enginee...
What do you like most about Lumu?
Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time.
What needs improvement with Lumu?
There is always room for improvement. I am not giving it a perfect score because I am sure there is something that could be enhanced.Having some sort of certification or training, along with more p...
What is your primary use case for Lumu?
We use it as our managed SOC instead of contracting with an MSP. It coordinates endpoint and gives us a single pane of glass for our security events.It fulfills the role of a SIEM, serving as our d...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Awake Security Platform
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

- Dolby Laboratories- Seattle Genetics- ARM Energy- Ooma- Prophix- Yapstone
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Arista NDR vs. Lumu and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.