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

Azure Network Watcher vs DX NetOps 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

Azure Network Watcher
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
48th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
DX NetOps
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
44th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
AIOps (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Azure Network Watcher is 0.4%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of DX NetOps is 0.6%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Emanuel Kjellin - PeerSpot reviewer
An affordable solution to block and analyze the situation with VPN troubleshooting feature
If Azure Network Monitor is part of the solution, it's a comprehensive tool. For example, during cloud migration, the workload on the cloud can be significant. However, the Ethernet solution is low cost and provides a fast return on investment. In larger scenarios, such as a major deployment, the return on investment might take three months to a year. The solution involves managing workloads, machine storage, and network modes.
Mark Tukh - PeerSpot reviewer
Leverages comprehensive network monitoring and AI-driven automation for enhanced performance analysis
There is a model for network traffic analysis in the NetOps product called NetOps Flow Analyzer. It provides all the necessary protocols and analysis. DX NetOps supports network monitoring across hybrid environments, though I hope it works out of the box. The product features include automation through AI, allowing out-of-the-box analysis of performance data, building baseline trends, and enabling configuration of dynamic thresholds relative to collected data.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It provides good visibility."
"The most valuable features I have found are typology, visualization, and capture."
"What I like most about Azure Network Watcher is that it's focused more on the architecture. I also like that it has a packet capture feature that tells you how the packet travels and whether it's exiting Azure, etc."
"I like the visibility."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is good for monitoring device behavior."
"We use the solution to monitor network services. It helps to capture any network issues."
"The stability is very good. I rate it a ten out of ten."
"The AI is the best feature in this solution."
"It's good for root cause analysis for network problems and network link problems."
"The best features I've seen so far with DX NetOps are that it can work with large scale systems, and it has a lot of functionalities and matrices."
"I like that it provides an overall view of our network. From the topology view to every event, we can view it. We can also see the interface utilization for future capacity planning. It fits our use case and environment."
"I rate the stability of the product as ten on a scale of one to ten, indicating that it is very stable."
"A highly scalable solution."
"The product features include automation through AI, allowing out-of-the-box analysis of performance data, building baseline trends, and enabling configuration of dynamic thresholds relative to collected data."
"The solution is stable."
 

Cons

"The solution could improve by limiting the need to clarify the logs. When the clarification is minimized, it is better for everyone involved."
"Azure Network Watcher could improve by having other built-in applications. For example, an application to log activities for in and outbound traffic."
"The initial setup and initial learning curve could be improved to be easier."
"I would like to see in the future if we can troubleshoot as a firewall because it is equipment as a network player and some diagnostics."
"User experience could be improved."
"Azure Network Watcher needs to have better documentation and it needs to capture information accurately."
"The initial setup and deployment could be improved to be simplified."
"I still use Wireshark and Azure Network Watcher to get the required data. My team captures the traffic from Azure Network Watcher, downloads it, then imports that traffic into Wireshark to get more details on the number of hits and replies, for example. If you can do that on Azure Network Watcher and have Wireshark built-in, that would make Azure Network Watcher better. If Azure Network Watcher has that functionality where you won't need a third-party tool to get what you need, that would be helpful. I'm also expecting more from Azure Network Watcher. It's more complex than knowing how the IP flows from its source to the destination. The tool also needs more open-source features, such as having some built-in Wireshark that improves monitoring for customers. Sometimes, you encounter a VPN tunnel, network, or routing issue, but finding out more about the blockage is challenging. Is it one hundred percent an Azure issue? Is it a peer issue? You don't get complete information from Azure Network Watcher, so you must use other tools and depend on your strategies to resolve a specific issue. If more features could be added in the next release of Azure Network Watcher, specifically ones you can find on open-source tools, then that would be a plus point for the tool."
"Technical support could be more responsive."
"One improvement that could make the product better is to streamline its modules into a more cohesive solution."
"It would be better if they had an NFA network analysis feature. We appreciate features like extended network security for bucket flows, but it would be better to have some IDs, IPS functionalities, DDoS, or something like that."
"Lacks dashboards and better integration with other solutions."
"It would be useful to have more AI features."
"Technical support needs to be better. They need to be more knowledgeable and responsive."
"DX NetOps is somewhat convoluted, and some of the programming constructs can be documented or driven through languages such as Python, Perl, and shell scripting, but they have their proprietary language, which may not be very user-friendly."
"The licensing cost of DX NetOps is expensive, not very affordable, and on the top of the price range in the market."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Azure Network Watcher is a little bit expensive."
"The pricing is good. It's not too expensive."
"Price-wise, I have no information on how much Azure Network Watcher costs."
"The price of the solution is reasonable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
10%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about DX NetOps?
It is straightforward to configure, and you can quickly gather data from your infrastructure.
What needs improvement with DX NetOps?
We have not used the predictive analytics capability of DX NetOps in impacting our network management processes. My experience with using automated root cause analysis is that it tells the symptoms...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Fujitsu
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Network Watcher vs. DX NetOps and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.