No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs SolarWinds Network Automation Manager 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
32nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (4th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (6th), Cisco Security Portfolio (6th)
SolarWinds Network Automati...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
92nd
Average Rating
5.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Network Automation (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is 0.9%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SolarWinds Network Automation Manager is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Network Analytics0.9%
SolarWinds Network Automation Manager0.4%
Other98.7%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Akash Das Barman - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Trainee at DataSpace Academy
Network analytics has reduced investigation time and provides deeper visibility into lateral movement
Several features often look very promising during evaluation or implementation but end up being used only lightly in day-to-day operations. Advanced reporting and scheduled compliance reports look very attractive for audit and compliance teams at implementation time and can generate structured reports for visibility, risk posture, and traffic summaries. In practice, many teams do not rely on it heavily because SIEM tools or GRC platforms already handle reporting better. Built-in threat intelligence feeds represent another area where expectations do not always match usage. The platform includes threat intelligence-based detection and classifications. Initially, teams expect to depend on this heavily, but later SOC teams often prefer their own threat intelligence feeds or correlate intelligence inside SIEM instead. The built-in feeds are used but not as a primary detection source. Automated incident summaries and guided investigation views are designed to simplify triage by automatically grouping related activity into incidents. However, teams often move away from them due to various factors affecting adoption.
Giulio Valeri - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS SRL
Threat detection failures, poor technical support, and expensive
We use the solution to manage all of our customer's systems. We monitor and decide if everything is okay and if not, we do changes when needed. For example, if there is a need to change the antivirus software we can automate the process and install the new one. There are scripts within the software…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Being able to look at the Layer 7 application and get information about intrusion attempts is the most valuable feature for us."
"This solution is doing everything that we want, and my only complaint is in regards to the quirks during installation."
"This solution allows us to be more agile when it comes to troubleshooting our NetFlow and our network systems."
"From a security standpoint, it is just seeing pockets as well. Visibility is very key for us."
"The most valuable feature is its alerts and dashboard."
"Another notable feature of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is its Layer 7 visibility, which allows us to monitor and analyze network communications at the application layer."
"Being able to see the actual data flows transiting the network versus what we had planned is a great sanity check for our overall design planning."
"Stealthwatch doubled our threat detection rate, while halving our incident response time and the time it takes us to detect and remediate threats."
"The installation is easy."
"The solution offers so many great resources, it makes them a powerhouse in the market."
"We are satisfied with the stability of the solution."
 

Cons

"I would like to see interoperability with other Cisco products because we have ThousandEyes, Cisco Prime, and others. The interaction among these is important to us."
"Their response capability and the ability to push out responses along with changes in the network is important. This is something lacking, they don't have a lot of that, it's a passive tool."
"The expensive nature of the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The reporting of day-to-day metrics still has room for improvement."
"Stealthwatch needs improvement when it comes to speed."
"Complexity on integration is not so straightforward and you really need an expert to help build it out."
"Its granularity for RBAC roles-based access control needs improvement."
"It hasn't really improved our direct detection rate but it has definitely reduced our incident response time as we wouldn't have been able to detect threats or immediate risks without this solution."
"We now use ConnectWise because while using SolarWinds we were attacked by ransomware. The solution did not protect us."
"The price could be a bit lower."
"We did not like SolarWinds because it was not able to communicate between UPSA and our accounting system. They should have better integration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"On a yearly basis, licensing is somewhere around $30,000."
"Our fees are approximately $3,000 USD."
"NetFlow is very expensive."
"This is an expensive product. We have quit paying for support because we don't want to have to upgrade it and keep paying for it."
"The licensing costs are outrageous."
"It is worth the cost."
"The yearly licensing cost is about $50,000."
"Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The price of SolarWinds Network Automation Manager is fair. However, it is more expensive than ConnectWise."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
Government
8%
Government
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Performing Arts
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise52
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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?
Several features often look very promising during evaluation or implementation but end up being used only lightly in day-to-day operations. Advanced reporting and scheduled compliance reports look ...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Stealthwatch?
My main use case for Cisco Secure Network Analytics has been network visibility and anomaly-based threat detection within the enterprise environment. In security operations and VAPT-related activit...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch
SolarWinds NAM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF
Maalem Financing Company, School City of Hammond
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs. SolarWinds Network Automation Manager and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.