We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) and ManageEngine OpManager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The automated network topology map is excellent; it shows connected networks, where they're going, and what they're visible on."
"The quick alerts in the event the equipment goes up or down is the most valuable feature."
"Auvik is easy to use. The first thing you see when you open it up is a map of the United States or wherever you are, and it shows the locations of all of your network endpoints. For discovery, you set credentials and manage the credentials and it tells you when it needs a new credential. So you just click the "Manage Credentials" button and it takes you to the right spot. You enter in a new credential and then it starts looking closer at the device. It can give you all kinds of information from inside the device's log. We use it for CIS logs and we use it for just regular logging. The CIS log was something I was looking for in the other products, just so we have a place for the CIS logs to congregate so we can look them up."
"Auvik's reliability is impressive."
"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."
"The automated, out-of-the-box device configuration backup capability is one of the key features for me in Auvik. To manage a network, one of my key requirements is to be able to rebuild that network if something catastrophic happens. Having up-to-date backups is a must, and this is a tool that I count on to get that right, and it has always performed as I expect."
"The stand-out feature is the automated config backup on networking devices. This automation is handy in a bind when a machine crashes, and you need to pull the config out of Auvik."
"The biggest draw for me is the flexibility of being alerted. If something happens with my critical infrastructure, I get real-time alerts on it in Teams."
"The detections are fine when they work."
"The solution is finely stable."
"I liked Network Configuration Manager. They had some pretty decent features there, and they also had pretty good monitoring and alerts."
"We find the networking aspect of this solution to be the most valuable."
"This is a good general monitoring system that has all the features we require and they constantly update with new capabilities."
"The solution is scalable."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to reach most of our network devices and get the most from them."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring alerts. The administrators are immediately notified and can do the required action immediately. This is the feature we value and use the most."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The logging features could be a little bit better polished, although that aspect is relatively new. It comes in as raw data, with different formats for different vendors. It's not immediately clear to people what's going on with some of that and you have to read through the codes. Some of the higher-end logging solutions, like Splunk, which is very expensive, can parse through it and correlate items better. Improvement to the logging features would be a value-add, but I'm still very happy that it exists."
"Some of the automation pieces for discovery still need a little bit more improvement. I wouldn't mind seeing some more security features as that's the world we're driving into. I know Auvik probably wants to try to keep itself separate because that's its brand, but even if they brought on board another brand that was able to plug into them, it would benefit us. It would lower some more network security costs if as a company, they are a one-stop shop. They have already got the network piece going. If they improved in that area and focused a lot on that, they would gain me as a customer, and they would probably gain a lot of others."
"A room for improvement would be integration with our help desk system."
"Auvik's notifications could be better."
"Although the network topology is excellent, it has a hard time picking up some devices on the network. A device might not be fully supported, or Auvik is unable to pull all the information from it."
"I would like to see improvement in terms of its integration with other applications and systems. I know that they are adding new systems. However, there is still work to be done there, such as integration with MS Teams. That is not working great for us."
"I don't know if it has integrations with ticketing systems so that alerts would get to the ticketing system right away. That would be a good feature to add."
"Sometimes it's a little bit slow to load, but I can't think of anything else that could be improved."
"The solution's reports need to include the number of applications consumed."
"With regard to configurations, however, it would be nice to have more documentation on SNMP configurations. For example, if I want to add a new vendor, it would be great if ManageEngine provided the requirements for that vendor, such as the commands needed."
"The dashboard could include more features."
"ManageEngine OpManager could improve by having a better cloud presence."
"ManageEngine OpManager could improve the default dashboards that are available. We are not able to customize them easily and they do not give us the information we need unless we customize them. You need to have the technical knowledge to be able to do it, the customization should be easier."
"The dashboard has some limitations and should be more user-friendly."
"ManageEngine OpManager can improve by having better updates for critical issues."
"There are certain things that are not possible to do with Op Manager. It's a solution that still needs time to develop."
More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Monitoring Software with 131 reviews while ManageEngine OpManager is ranked 15th in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while ManageEngine OpManager is rated 8.0. 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 ManageEngine OpManager writes "Helps us monitor all the infrastructure in our company but UI monitoring is not practical". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, Meraki Dashboard, SolarWinds NPM and Domotz, whereas ManageEngine OpManager is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, SCOM and Nagios XI. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. ManageEngine OpManager 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.
