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

Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs Fortra's Intermapper comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 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

Auvik Network Management (ANM)
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
196
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (3rd), Network Troubleshooting (1st), Cloud Monitoring Software (4th), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (2nd)
Fortra's Intermapper
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
84th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is 0.9%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortra's Intermapper is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

HardeepSingh2 - PeerSpot reviewer
Centralized dashboard and real-time picture of the network improve efficiency
We have integrated Auvik Network Management with PRTG and our ServiceNow ticketing tool through API. It automatically creates notifications and sends them to Teams and our ticketing tool. It saves a lot of time. It saved 40% to 50% of our time. Auvik Network Management's network map, together with the dashboard, gives me a real-time picture of my network. It allows me to see the inventory under all sites and devices. My company has 55 sites. Whenever I want to go to a site, I can navigate the network path, and it provides me with the topology directly from source to destination. It shows all events, such as downtime or critical warnings, in an easy-to-use manner. It provides information about device interfaces, device bandwidth, latency, etc. I just need to click to view more detailed information. I have never found a scenario where Auvik Network Management did not allow me to find my site or any device. I can use global search to find my device or site and get the information easily. However, proper configuration within Auvik is critical for accurate reporting, covering all interfaces and their utilization. Using the automated documentation capabilities of Auvik Network Management is very easy. Over the last year, I have been continuously exploring this, finding that the API integration with our other platforms is straightforward, as it just requires configuration on both ends for proper communication. I didn't find any issue so far. It has been awesome. The network map dashboard of Auvik Network Management gives me full visibility into my network, making it easy to troubleshoot issues with inbuilt tools such as traceroute, ping, and SNMP. It helps diagnose problems quickly without having to type commands manually. Real-time performance insights from Auvik Network Management are very critical for my organization as we currently manage 55 sites with over 2,000 devices, and we need to keep track of numerous services such as Active Directory, DNS, and many protocols, so Auvik is essential as it consolidates everything on one dashboard. Auvik Network Management has decreased our mean time to resolution by 40% to 50%. It allows us to see traffic flow in real time without needing to guess. I can just log into the Auvik dashboard and quickly get results. Auvik Network Management helps my organization troubleshoot network issues proactively by providing alerts and monitoring. Instead of waiting for user feedback, we receive alerts on issues such as high latency or device failures directly on the dashboard. The impact of Auvik Network Management on reducing business disruptions related to network issues is significant. It reduces our downtime, improves security, and simplifies complex tasks into straightforward ones, making it the best tool for managing our complex network. We have configured multiple notification channels. We get alerts through email or integrated platforms such as Teams, which helps streamline communication. It makes it easy to collect information from various devices. We just need to configure the collector, IP addresses, and connections, and get approval from both ends. It creates a unique ID, and it can communicate with those devices.
AL
It tremendously cuts down our troubleshooting timeframe, but needs advanced SLA monitoring and reporting
They can do a better job with SLA reporting. It does some basic reporting, but it really doesn't offer the ability to monitor devices by groups, customers, or carrier to give an overall health performance of specifically-defined environments. That's where HelpSystems Intermapper could have done a better job. I would love to see advanced SLA monitoring and reporting in this solution. They already have a lot of ingredients. They already have SNMP polling. It is really about what people are looking for from SLA monitoring, especially someone who looks at the network topology. You want to see your endpoints. You want to see half of your endpoints by simply analyzing ICMP or SNMP-based availability of your endpoints. Having an ability to define your group and how you bring devices into your group would be a huge benefit.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Automatic network mapping, alerting functionalities, and TrafficInsights are valuable."
"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."
"All of the features are valuable, but the ability to remote into anything, whether it's a terminal or a browser, is really big for us. It makes things a lot easier day-to-day."
"A simple site view with the associated devices populating as things to add to or remove from the network is valuable. It's also nice to have it integrated with our ticketing system to create tickets in certain cases for devices that go down or have some high-level alerts, such as high CPU or overtemperature."
"Auvik has alerts that help you be proactive by telling you when something is behaving abnormally."
"The ability to put in individualized SNMP checks that might not be in the automated playbook is a valuable feature."
"The visibility that it provides is probably the most valuable feature because we need to know what our sites look like. Understanding what our sites look like and knowing about what kind of network gear or network equipment these sites are running is very important for us. Previously, we didn't have visibility into everything."
"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."
"What is really cool about HelpSystems InterMapper is that because of its SNMP base, you can integrate all different makes and models on the same map. You, of course, can have more than one map, but you have an option to have visibility into the entire network from one centralized system. You can monitor IPs, routers, radios, DC power plants, and UPS. You can do it all from one network management and monitoring solution. That's what really makes HelpSystems Intermapper great. Another great thing about HelpSystems InterMapper is that you can really bundle different probes under one device. You can have a bundled device. You can monitor the physical status of a host based on the IP availability. You can also monitor services and actually see if anything happens. You can quickly determine whether it is the application layer, host layer, or network layer. HelpSystems Intermapper gives such a unique representation of a network. Ever since we started using HelpSystems InterMapper, we don't have to document everything in a detailed format and store it somewhere. Right now, it is really a combination of network topology, network monitoring, and network analyzing. So, in my opinion, it is awesome. When you have your SNMP topology defined, you don't require a dedicated NMS engineer to manage your system, which is another great thing about HelpSystems InterMapper. I see how our operators get so excited by having the ability to map a device or interface and connect interfaces together. HelpSystems InterMapper is also very operator friendly; not just user friendly, but also operator friendly. This is a unique feature, and it works really great."
"It's a nice graphical interface, a nice map, that relates Layer 1 to Layer 3, virtually instantly, to the Helpdesk support staff. It provides a default place to get critical information so we can deploy our staff."
"The most valuable features are its: log history, real-time monitoring capabilities, accuracy - the number of false positives is very low, and the mapping features."
"It's all today portal-based which is a good feature for us."
 

Cons

"It is amazing in keeping device inventories up-to-date. It mostly keeps them up to date as things change. There were a couple of hiccups where a device would get replaced and the mapping would break, and we'd have to go in and fix the mapping. It was with devices that Auvik couldn't fully discover or devices that would change frequently, such as cell phones or other devices on the network that are dynamic and change all the time. The integration would just show up with an IP address and a MAC address. There was no other information in them, which wasn't very helpful. They were the devices that Auvik wasn't able to discover fully. If they had full SNMP or SSH credentials and Auvik knew what the device was and it was matched correctly in Auvik, then Auvik could push it through."
"There is room for improvement in the reporting aspect."
"I requested that Auvik implement an alarm system to notify me immediately of any disruptions or anomalies."
"One drawback I found with Auvik was its inability to generate clear network diagrams."
"When credentials are rejected, I'd like to get a little information about why in the error message."
"The network maps can be confusing due to the wide scope of the network, making it difficult to find specific details."
"There are spots in the interface that could use a little more work as it is congested with a lot of information in one spot."
"When it tries to build the topology, it does it in a way that is usually incorrect. It cannot validate VLANs correctly, and it is a bit cumbersome. When we have a known topology, it makes it completely different. The network maps are not accurate."
"I'd love to see more of the network management side of it coming back into it. If we were able to run scripts to bounce ports on switches, that would be great. It's asking a lot, but it's actually very doable because I do it through scripting into other products. If we could incorporate that directly into Intermapper, that would be fantastic."
"They can do a better job with SLA reporting. It does some basic reporting, but it really doesn't offer the ability to monitor devices by groups, customers, or carrier to give an overall health performance of specifically-defined environments. That's where HelpSystems Intermapper could have done a better job. I would love to see advanced SLA monitoring and reporting in this solution. They already have a lot of ingredients. They already have SNMP polling. It is really about what people are looking for from SLA monitoring, especially someone who looks at the network topology. You want to see your endpoints. You want to see half of your endpoints by simply analyzing ICMP or SNMP-based availability of your endpoints. Having an ability to define your group and how you bring devices into your group would be a huge benefit."
"It's a smaller solution so tools are not as advanced as you would find in a larger solution"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Auvik is significantly cheaper than what we were using before."
"The price of Auvik is okay. It is appropriate for the market."
"The pricing is kind of steep, but it's worth the price. There's no beating around the bush. It's an expensive solution, but it's really the best solution there is for us."
"Auvik charges based on the number of network devices being used."
"It's absolutely worth the money. I would probably charge more if I were them. They don't charge you for anything that's not a router, switch, or firewall controller, or a network device. So, you can throw anything like servers and ESX hosts."
"The pricing is good, but I haven't looked at the pricing in a while. So, I don't know if it has changed or not. As far as I know, the pricing is still where it should be. I have no issues with it."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
858,945 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
22%
Government
19%
Computer Software Company
7%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Auvik?
The most valuable feature for us in Auvik is the network topology.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Auvik?
I only know the pricing for the first year of Auvik Network Management (ANM). After that, pricing is managed by my manager.
What needs improvement with Auvik?
It gets cluttered depending on how your sites are organized with Auvik Network Management (ANM), and if you have a ton of sites or if you set up your sites in different ways. The documentation goes...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
HelpSystems Intermapper
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Greater Media Detroit, University of British Columbia, Don's Farm Supply
Find out what your peers are saying about Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Fortra's Intermapper and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
858,945 professionals have used our research since 2012.