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

Broadcom Network Flow Analysis vs Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 2025

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

Broadcom Network Flow Analysis
Ranking in Network Management Applications
18th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (60th), Network Troubleshooting (10th)
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN
Ranking in Network Management Applications
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (2nd), WAN Edge (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Network Management Applications category, the mindshare of Broadcom Network Flow Analysis is 1.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is 2.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Management Applications Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN2.4%
Broadcom Network Flow Analysis1.8%
Other95.8%
Network Management Applications
 

Featured Reviews

Purneswara Rao - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Consultant at KyndleIT Consulting
A stable tool that helps identify the complete flow analysis in a network
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that the complete flow analysis can be identified through the tool. The classification of each protocol and how the bandwidth utilization is happening with the protocols while managing to get SLAs, IP protocols, and QoS metrics is possible because of the product.
ND
Network Manager at HPCL
Faced complex visibility and policy challenges but have improved basic traffic routing control
I have found some other solutions more insightful and user-friendly as compared to Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN, but the basic SD-WAN functionality is good enough. I am using it only because it was done as a pilot project, specifically for my 60 to 70 sites. For the majority of the sites, I am using Fortinet's Secure SD-WAN solution and I found that more viable and more in alignment with my requirements. For example, there is not any Internet Service Database available in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN intrinsically. If I want to write a policy based on applications, I am not able to write it, at least in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Viptela deployment that we have done, and that is fairly easy to do in Fortinet. The second issue is the logging capability. I think the visibility that Fortinet Secure SD-WAN has is not even comparable. Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN does not provide that sort of insight or control as far as traffic steering is concerned. With respect to the SLAs, I barely know which sort of SLAs are violated in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN, so I do not have clear visibility on where the traffic is moving from at my spoke or hub locations. I believe Fortinet gives me a very clear picture of where the traffic is going. Overall visibility, whether it is data traffic or logs, is much better in Fortinet compared to Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. The complexity of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Viptela is noticeable and quite complicated to configure. If something breaks, you have to involve TAC and others to fix it. On the contrary, you can work with underlays. Even if your IPsec overlay tunnel is down, it does not impact your production. Thus, we find Fortinet's solution significantly better than Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN solution. I have used Application-aware Routing in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. However, I found it to be very complicated, especially regarding policy writing. For my breakout of VC traffic, we had to write a bunch of IP addresses for Zoom, Webex, and others. Presently, it can only identify Webex as an application, and I highly doubt whether there is any application identification for Zoom and other platforms, as we were not able to find it during our implementation. It is done through static whitelisting of the IPs, which is not a scalable solution since IPs can change at any time. Overall, the application-aware routing policies are not as flexible and scalable as the Internet Service Database feature of Fortinet provides. The struggles encompass policy writing, logging capabilities, traffic visibility, and complex configuration. There is also the issue of load balancing. We have faced considerable challenges with traffic load balancing between the links. Although the SLA targets are configurable, understanding how traffic flows is challenging, making troubleshooting exceedingly difficult. Overall, I find it a quite complicated solution with not that much operational usability.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is an overall stable solution."
"This solution has helped our organization by allowing us to have visibility. We deal with cybersecurity, so visibility is very important."
"It is very stable with very good firmware."
"SD-WAN provides a range of common benefits, including cost reduction, increased visibility, and scalability"
"Initial setup is easy."
"The reliability is high and we have only had to restart it once or twice over the years."
"The solution's application control and application traffic steering tool are its most valuable aspects in terms of how we utilize the product."
"The initial setup is straightforward and easy to deploy."
"SD-WAN is very stable - once it's deployed, you can just forget about it, it runs by itself."
"The most valuable features of Cisco SD-WAN include the DIA and its integration with Cisco Umbrella for DNS security."
 

Cons

"I would like to see more security features, like a lost protection package."
"Currently, Broadcom Network Flow Analysis does not support high-availability solutions, making it an area that needs improvement."
"They should enhance the reporting because, as it is today, they need more executive-level reports."
"It would be better if it provided more visibility. At present, we can't troubleshoot in real time."
"I would like to see features related to security compliance, including a view of compliance with standards. With this, I should be able to do an audit of my network with SDWAN."
"It is expensive."
"Cisco's router and voice gateway has not been available since the launch of SD-WAN."
"We have found that their SD-WAN has a lot of scope for improvement."
"Cisco SD-WAN's clustering mechanism needs to be improved. If there are more than five milliseconds of latency time between installations of the VM manager, the cluster automatically breaks down."
"We need them to start focusing on the SD-WAN compatibility with other environments and not being so vendor locked with Cisco environments."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If you make a DX NetOps-based purchase and the complete suite of products that fall under DX NetOps from Broadcom, then you get Network Flow Analysis along with DX NetOps Performance Management and DX Spectrum."
"The pricing is fair, and it's on par with the market vendors. But based on the competition, Cisco could work on the pricing, go deep on discounts and provide more commercially viable solutions to customers."
"The price is high."
"We can only buy three-year licenses, not monthly. The cost seems high for us, especially since we're in Vietnam, which isn't a rich country. But we still like the product because it is good."
"The cost is reasonable. I would rate the price as seven out of ten."
"The Cisco SD-WAN licensing model needs to be simplified. There are currently three types of licenses: enterprise agreements, individual licenses, and DNA subscriptions. This can confuse customers, requiring a dedicated person to determine which type of license is right for their organization."
"The price of Cisco SD-WAN could improve, it is expensive. The cost of the solution is approximately 30 percent higher than competitors."
"The price of the solution is the only negative factor, it is much more expensive compared with the Cisco Meraki SD-WAN solution."
"The cost of Cisco SD-WAN is high and has room for improvement compared to competitors such as Fortinet which has similar functionality."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Management Applications solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
8%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise44
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Cisco SD-WAN?
When considering the most valuable features of Cisco SD-WAN, the decoupling of self-monitoring stands out significantly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco SD-WAN?
The pricing of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is rated between eight and nine out of ten, where ten is the most expensive.
What needs improvement with Cisco SD-WAN?
More or less, it's the same with Cisco in terms of complexity and pricing, so there's not much of a difference. They might want to consider incorporating features seen in Versa or other competitors...
 

Also Known As

CA NetQoS Reporter Analyzer, CA NFA, CA Network Flow Analysis
Cisco SD-WAN
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Empowered, BCBST
Doyle Research, Ashton Metzler & Associates
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Network Flow Analysis vs. Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.