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

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs InfoVista VistaInsight 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 Secure Network Analytics
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
33rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (5th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (8th), Cisco Security Portfolio (7th)
InfoVista VistaInsight
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
90th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is 1.2%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of InfoVista VistaInsight is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco Secure Network Analytics1.2%
InfoVista VistaInsight0.2%
Other98.6%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Muhammad Harun-Owr-Roshid - PeerSpot reviewer
Have streamlined network visibility and troubleshooting while seeing benefits from AI integration
In terms of improvements for Cisco Secure Network Analytics, from the implementation point of view, now that AI is in use, some other features need to be upgraded considering AI solutions. Proper management of the database is also important; it should be centralized for easier data collection from a single database. When precise manual analysis is needed, it's sometimes difficult, so having a centralized database will allow network admins to find actual scenarios more effectively, especially since some information may not be visible on the GUI. Cisco should upgrade their hardware part to run the database, because sometimes it cannot handle the load while all features are running in the network. The database management should indeed be centralized because while AI runs behind the systems, central management is essential. For example, in a network with 100 Cisco switches, a few routers, firewalls, and access points, all data generated should be preserved in a central database. This approach simplifies management and analysis for troubleshooting, as GUI interfaces may not always provide visible information. Centralizing the database will allow for better understanding of which information is preserved for each specific device.
YE
A powerful service that is very stable and scalable
It's a very powerful service, you have to use your training and understand how to work it. After that, it's very easy to collect and to use. It may be hard to use for the administrators. It's like a Ferrari, if you're a very good driver you'll go to 300 but you have to know how to drive it. If you have a Ferrari but you don't know how to use it, it's not going to be good. Also, it's very important to understand what the customer needs to decide on what kind of products you are going to use, and what product and what solution to implement. I would rate the solution nine out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AI provides suggested common lines and protection features that help safeguard networks from various threats or unwanted situations."
"Ease of deployment, once you get your ducks in a row."
"The search options on Cisco Stealthwatch are the most valuable. You can get very granular with it, down to the kilobits or the seconds if you want. The product supports any time frame that you need, so that is nice."
"The most valuable feature is having visibility into the data segments throughout our network."
"The most valuable part is that Stealthwatch is part of a portfolio of security devices from Cisco. Cisco literally can touch every single end point, every single ingress and egress point in the network. Nobody else has that."
"Being able to identify specific date closed across the network is invaluable."
"The artifacts available in the tool provide better information for analyzing network traffic. It enables a holistic view of network traffic and general packet analysis. It's easy to identify anomalies without the use of signatures. The way in which we implemented Stealthwatch Cloud has enabled my team to analyze traffic behind proxies."
"Using the Cognitive Analytics feature, we have complete visibility that we didn’t have before."
"My experience with technical support has been perfect."
 

Cons

"The solution should have the ability to analyze security events not only at the network layer but also at the application and OS layers."
"I would like to see better filters."
"The GUI could use some improvement. Being able to find features more easily would be a great improvement if it was simplified."
"The version with the Dell server had iDRAC problems. Often, it reported iDRAC failure."
"I would like to see some improvement when it comes to reporting."
"The initial setup was complex."
"It's too complicated to install, when starting out."
"It is time-consuming to set it up and understand how the tool works."
"The presentation of the features can be improved. It can be more user-friendly for the visual part of the portal and to allow the customer to be able to use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing for this solution is good."
"It is worth the cost."
"The solution is expensive. It costs several hundred thousand dollars per year (depending on how many flows you are collecting)."
"The licensing costs are outrageous."
"Pricing is much higher compared to other solutions."
"Our fees are approximately $3,000 USD."
"NetFlow is very expensive."
"One of the things which bugs me about Lancope is the licensing. We understand how licensing works. Our problem is when we bought and purchased most of these Lancope devices, we did so with our sister company. Somewhere within the purchase and distribution, licensing got mixed up. That is all on Cisco, and it is their responsibility. They allotted some of our sister company's equipment to us, and some of our equipment to them. To date, they have never been able to fix it."
"The license is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
869,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise52
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Stealthwatch?
The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is the Threat Intelligence integration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Stealthwatch?
Regarding cost, for the Bangladesh context, Cisco Secure Network Analytics is a little bit high-priced because we are a developing country, making it tough to manage affordable solutions. However, ...
What needs improvement with Cisco Stealthwatch?
In terms of improvements for Cisco Secure Network Analytics, from the implementation point of view, now that AI is in use, some other features need to be upgraded considering AI solutions. Proper m...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch
VistaInsight
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF
Ooredoo Tunisia
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Auvik, SolarWinds and others in Network Monitoring Software. Updated: October 2025.
869,771 professionals have used our research since 2012.