We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) and Corelight 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."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."
"I like Auvik's mapping. Your home dashboard has a map view where you can see potential issues on the endpoints. If an AP or switch has a problem, you can drill down into those to see how it's affecting the endpoints."
"The alerting is fantastic; if something goes offline, we're notified right away. It gives us a lot of peace of mind knowing the solution will alert us to issues automatically 24/7."
"We have backup connectivity in case of some failures. So, it has been of some help. Our mean time to resolution has been decreased by half an hour."
"The best features are the alerting and monitoring."
"The quick alerts in the event the equipment goes up or down is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features for me are network monitoring and alerting."
"Auvik's auto-detection feature is something I haven't seen in other monitoring systems. We can keep track of our internal device tables to map the devices on the network. The diagram saves us a lot of time. Usually, our new customers don't provide much information about their networks, so we need to spend a lot of time logging into every single device, going into the CDP and LLDP, making nodes, building diagrams, and adding more information. Auvik does it instantaneously."
"It is easy to deploy and easy to handle."
"The most valuable feature is the embedded IDS from Suricata."
"It's an easy way for us to get visibility in a client's environment."
"It's easy to create additional dashboards specific to supporting specific tasks."
"Corelight is easy to use."
"They need to improve the reporting system. They still don't have a proper reporting system in Auvik. They have built a dashboard in Power BI using APIs, but they should build some sort of report within Auvik itself. If Auvik fixes the reporting or comes up with a good reporting module, it will change the game."
"I've had some issues where the solution repeatedly discovers a device I don't want to manage and alerts me about it. This is probably me not using the tool correctly, or it could be Auvik recognizing the device in different ways."
"The biggest area for improvement is the speed of the website because it's not something we host. Each of our clients hosts an agent that gathers the logs and pushes it up. The website can be slow to click around in or click through."
"There is room for improvement on the development side. As new devices and models come out from different manufacturers, they aren't always supported by Auvik right away. For example, Sophos switches came out within the past year and we only have CLI support right now for those..."
"I would relegate the network map to its area instead of being the focus of every page. The network map is in the front and center of the UI. I would rather have the option to look at it when I need it instead of having it on every single page. It's beautiful, but I don't need it on every page."
"The use of a mobile app would be very beneficial because sometimes I cannot access a computer."
"More capabilities in terms of default OIDs, so we can leverage more of the information from SNMP would be good to see. It's been a while since I messed with the OIDs, but the last time I was trying to get additional information from printers, such as the model number. I was able to find that information, but it took a good amount of research to figure out how. I want to see more default capability regarding what information gets spit out from SNMP."
"Navigating around the map on more complex networks is pretty painful if you're showing endpoints. I know there are filters to knock it down, but sometimes that's not enough. It handles like 'early-90s Java.'"
"Machine learning could be a good improvement, but it's very costly."
"Corelight hasn’t added features in a long time."
"They can enhance the interface of the product. They can make it more interactive and also easier to use for feature access."
"In the next release, building a graphical user interface would be helpful."
"The solution’s architecture is complex and difficult to understand. There are multiple machines and VMs."
More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) with 137 reviews while Corelight is ranked 7th in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) with 5 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while Corelight is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Auvik Network Management (ANM) writes "Enables us to get on top of issues before they become an outage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Corelight writes "An open-source solution that gave us insight into our clients' network traffic flow ". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Meraki Dashboard and Zabbix, whereas Corelight is most compared with ExtraHop Reveal(x), Darktrace, Vectra AI, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Arista NDR. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Corelight 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.
