Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Auvik Network Management (ANM)
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
181
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (2nd), Network Troubleshooting (3rd), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (2nd)
Splunk Infrastructure Monit...
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
13th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Container Management (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
Unique Categories:
Network Monitoring Software
1.0%
Cloud Monitoring Software
0.7%
Container Management
0.2%
 

Featured Reviews

JA
Jun 25, 2024
Good network map and dashboard with helpful support
In terms of the dashboard, maybe seeing on the map, for example, if you have an access point that's connected to switch one, and the access point you do not have credentials for, that could help us make management a bit easier. However, it's not terrible. It's just something to make it easier. It has a monitoring feature. Besides just monitoring the network, you can tell Auvik to monitor a host name, like a domain name or an IP address on the cloud, and it just pings the IP address and gives you information. I feel like that's something that could potentially be improved a bit. For the service monitoring feature, we can check for port status or cloud ping checks. We can check against domains and against IP addresses in the cloud. That's a feature that has been of a lot of use to us. However, it is a little bit lacking in some features compared to other solutions that we have also used in the past. We used to use another solution, and we wanted to transition this service over to Auvik since Auvik does largely the same thing. However, as we were migrating, we noticed specific features were missing, and we could not add some of the monitoring back into Auvik since there were some technical limitations. For example, if Auvik has an IP address for the domain you want to monitor, and if the domain does not respond, it will take it as the services down, and it's going to trigger the alert at that point. It does not check when giving out a ping request. It checks by just making an HTTP request to the website. However, basically, some websites that we manage do not respond back to ping requests based on safety settings and so on. So, we have to do HTTP checks to check if the service is up. However, Auvik does not support that at the time.
KS
Jun 13, 2024
Makes troubleshooting easier and helps consolidate all the information in one place
A wide variety of logging makes log onboarding difficult. Over the years, Splunk has done various things to make it easier, so I want to give them props for that. However, the reality is that every vendor has its own logging format. Some vendors have multiple log formats because they change their own products over time. They have different log formats for different products in their own suites, and no industry standard makes it chaotic. Splunk is probably the best product out there in terms of how they handle it, but it's not perfect yet. They need to keep pushing that cutting edge and trying to improve it. I have no idea how they could do that because they're trying to wrangle chaos, and it's hard.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like how Auvik gives us a quick overview of the overall situation."
"Auvik seamlessly integrates with our ticketing system ConnectWise, which provides a basic alert via email. I also like how it automatically draws the network map and how you can easily filter by the alerts. If you click on the type of alert, it'll show you all the other alerts of that same type."
"The most valuable feature of Auvik is the remote access functionality."
"Remote accessibility of the network devices is the most valuable feature. I often have to log into switches and routers to make changes, and I can do so from any computer as long as I have an Internet connection. I don't need to have my laptop or a VPN. Auvik is faster."
"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."
"I like the ability to see bandwidth utilization on all the interfaces, and the automatic configuration backups are also useful."
"It's simplified tasks and made things easier."
"The ability to map out the network topology is one of the top features I like about Auvik. It's one of the best on the market. They have a feature called Loopback Detection, which has helped us, in many scenarios easily detect that without having to physically go to the location to see if there is a loopback somewhere."
"The most valuable feature is log reporting."
"The ability to create custom dashboards is one of the best features and that's typically why most people deploy Splunk. Users can create dashboards for just about anything."
"Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring reduces our mean time to resolve. We are more proactive than reactive."
"Splunk's GUI and dashboard capacity are the most valuable features of Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring."
"It's a very easy-to-use solution."
"Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring gives us complete visibility without the need for storage."
"It can monitor, get the data, and then report on the data."
"Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring provided our customers with visibility into their overall infrastructure."
 

Cons

"I would like to use different network protocols that we could implement."
"Implementing a configurable dashboard for the network map would enhance user experience in this regard."
"The mapping automatically finds all the interfaces but tags some of them incorrectly. For instance, if it can't find how a CPU interface is connected, it will use the MAC address last seen on the router and sometimes attribute cloud-connected devices to the route, but it's not actually there. That's not a true connection."
"The onboarding could be a bit better for Auvik. We've had a few issues out of the gate because we already had an existing Auvik setup that was invalidated. Given that we're a new customer, it's taken a while to get support for these issues. It's taken a couple of days, but I would have thought that as new customers, we'd get priority support until we've got the solution running."
"While Auvik excels in network management with a user-friendly interface, its customization and reporting features could benefit from improvement."
"The use of a mobile app would be very beneficial because sometimes I cannot access a computer."
"We use a service called Tailscale, a peer-to-peer private networking tool. My biggest issue with Auvik was getting it to scan devices across the Tailscale network. I suspect it's not supported there. That would be a valuable extension for us."
"The user interface is not intuitive."
"There is a lot of room for improvement with the automation."
"One thing I recently ran into was that the logs on the server most often get Gzipped after they have been rotated. We found that we were not monitoring some of the things, so we had to go back and pull them in. Right now, it pulls one at a time, untars it, or unzips it, so I cannot look at the entire history. There can be an improvement in that area."
"The clustering part of indexes can be more refined."
"A wide variety of logging makes log onboarding difficult."
"They do not have all the features that I expect right now."
"I would like to see an improvement and some innovation in the customer interface."
"The price has room for improvement."
"This solution is difficult to configure and the instructions are complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For small businesses with many devices, the tool is potentially unaffordable. Auvik Networks Inc. is competing with other companies offering very expensive products. Still, there's a gap in the market and potentially a lot of lost revenue for smaller customers, especially those with complex IT environments."
"For the size of our school, it is expensive, but I understand the reason behind the pricing."
"Auvik charges based on the number of network devices being used."
"Its licensing is very fair. The devices that stand to gain the most benefit from this product are the ones that are billed. In the case of routers, switches, and firewalls, I won't necessarily have the ability to put a management agent on them to gather errors and activity logs. This type of solution is a requirement for me to properly monitor and manage these devices. The devices that aren't being billed are workstation servers, etc. For those devices, I can put agents on them to monitor their health. It has a fair billing structure."
"I would love to be able to get into the tier with the sys logging and the NetFlow/sFlow. That tier is a little bit expensive for us. If that could come down a little bit in price, we would be using that everywhere."
"I appreciated the way Auvik's pricing scaled with the size of my network. We're a non-profit, and they gave us a non-profit discount. I didn't do an exhaustive comparison, but I felt their pricing was pretty reasonable. I'm a cheap guy when it comes to spending in a non-profit, but I did feel that what I was getting out of them was a good value for my dollar."
"I'm not on the procurement side, but I understand that the license is based on devices, not sensors. If you have 10 switches and one firewall, you count per device. You'll have 100 devices if there are 10 sites with the same setup. I think it's a lot more expensive to monitor 100 sensors in PRTG."
"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."
"Licensing cost is the biggest argument I get from those divesting from Splunk. There are those within our organization who say we are going to go to other tools since Splunk is too expensive."
"I am not in that circle, but we are currently licensing based on our queries. That is working out for us. Previously, it was by volume of data, and now, we can store as much data as we want."
"The product is a bit expensive considering the competition but the company may negotiate the price."
"It is expensive."
"Splunk has been fairly expensive, but it has been predictable."
"Splunk's infrastructure monitoring costs can be high because our billing is based on data volume measured in terabytes, rather than the number of devices being monitored."
"This is an expensive solution."
"I would rate the price of Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring as an eight out of ten, with ten being the most expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Construction Company
11%
Educational Organization
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
The pricing is a bit more on the higher end. If you are paying by device and you have a hundred billable devices, the pricing can get high pretty quickly.
What needs improvement with Auvik?
We might have encountered a bug. We notified Auvik when we had an issue with every single installation of their controllers. Using the normal uninstall process was not able to remove any of the con...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring?
Licensing cost is the biggest argument I get from those divesting from Splunk. There are those within our organization who say we are going to go to other tools since Splunk is too expensive. Till ...
What needs improvement with Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring?
We never had any issues when it comes to the type of use cases we are using it for. We did not need more advancement on it, but I know that, in general, everything can be updated. There are tiny li...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Splunk Insights for Infrastructure
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Entrust Datacard
Find out what your peers are saying about Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring and other solutions. Updated: July 2024.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.