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

Cisco DNA Center vs Juniper Mist Premium Analytics 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

Cisco DNA Center
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (1st), Network Automation (2nd)
Juniper Mist Premium Analytics
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
53rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco DNA Center is 1.4%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Juniper Mist Premium Analytics is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco DNA Center1.4%
Juniper Mist Premium Analytics0.5%
Other98.1%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Ahmed  Helmy - PeerSpot reviewer
Experience unified visibility and monitoring for enterprise campus and significant time savings and enhanced troubleshooting with reliable support
We have been working with Cisco DNA Center for ten years. Our clients use Cisco DNA Center for unified visibility/monitoring across Enterprise Campus both LAN & WLAN along with Access and fast technical issues troubleshooting The solution provides fast troubleshooting capabilities and fast…
Shiva_Prasad - PeerSpot reviewer
A cloud solution for warehousing with a troubleshooting feature
The initial setup is straightforward. It's based on user requirements. We also conduct heat mapping using a couple of tools. The only requirement is to understand the technical or configuration aspects from the user's end and then configure it. Mist takes no more than 15 to 20 minutes for a particular deployment. You need to understand the end user's environment and have a concrete plan on whether it's a greenfield installation or an existing one, considering the density and height. Based on that, we need to develop a passive heat map. Then, you need to discuss with the user to understand exactly what needs to be configured and what they require in their environment. Based on that, you can proceed with the installation. Additionally, you can perform post-installation heat mapping to ensure it matches the earlier heat map. I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It enables monitoring of various components such as access points, switch cards, and other elements within the company's solutions."
"It offers automation, security enforcement, analytics, and integration with other Cisco technologies, making it a key driver for efficient network operations and compliance with security protocols."
"What's most valuable in Cisco DNA Center is the ability to manage any Cisco infrastructure and device through it. Setup was straightforward."
"We can monitor all devices and get the required information using the product."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration."
"The solution helps with the management and orchestration of campaigns. It helps with visibility and analytics. I also like its SDA configuration."
"It gives us automation capabilities for pushing out the configuration to branch networks. It also provides visibility into the health of user network devices."
"Automation is another key highlight. With automation, you can automate everything through a single port."
"The solution is stable due to its Cloud-based nature, which eliminates downtime or crashing issues."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
 

Cons

"Cisco could improve the security side of their solutions."
"The pricing, setup cost, and licensing of Cisco DNA Center are expensive."
"The cost is very high."
"They should include UTM features in the product."
"The tool's deployment is complex. It also needs to improve its GUI."
"There should be an option for automation of template deployment by using the stored data. It is not easy to save configuration information for lots of devices without using other tools. There should be a tighter, better repository of information that can be merged with the templates."
"Technical support could be better. The price could be better, and it could be more stable."
"What I want to see in Cisco DNA Center in the future is more support for other platforms so that you can manage third-party products, such as Fortinet."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Before October 2024, there was room for improvement in the UI to make it more user-friendly. The Client Insight page on Juniper Mist Premium Analytics could be made simpler."
"The technical support needs improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We get a yearly license at the time we buy the product."
"The product is very costly."
"Cisco DNA Center is expensive."
"The solution is expensive."
"The partnership price is notably high, but it ultimately depends on the chosen business model."
"The price of the solution is expensive. The hardware is licensed on the device, but the hardware on the server is expensive."
"The solution is a little bit expensive but depends a lot on the customer's usage. If you use it in the right place, you can easily pay for it."
"The licensing cost for Cisco DNA Center is not more than that of other solutions."
"The solution is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
866,300 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise24
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco DNA Center?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco DNA Center?
After evaluating other solutions, we will provide feedback.
What needs improvement with Cisco DNA Center?
We have utilized the software-defined access (SDA) feature of Cisco DNA Center. The AI-driven needs enhancements and Integration and unification of visibility and monitoring to include other areas ...
What do you like most about Juniper Mist Premium Analytics?
We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Juniper Mist Premium Analytics?
The pricing for Juniper Mist is moderate. It is neither high nor low, making it affordable for customers who require the product.
What needs improvement with Juniper Mist Premium Analytics?
Before October 2024, there was room for improvement in the UI to make it more user-friendly. The Client Insight page on Juniper Mist Premium Analytics ( /products/juniper-mist-premium-analytics-rev...
 

Also Known As

DNA Center
No data available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco DNA Center vs. Juniper Mist Premium Analytics and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
866,300 professionals have used our research since 2012.