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

Comodo RMM vs N-able N-central 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

Comodo RMM
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
N-able N-central
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) category, the mindshare of Comodo RMM is 1.2%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of N-able N-central is 9.2%, down from 11.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
 

Featured Reviews

The solution has good features like security antivirus and the ability to use other applications on one dashboard
Comodo RMM is really, really slow to load, and connecting with most of my clients takes a while. You have to get back to your office before you have to be able to work effectively, which is a drawback for me. Comodo RMM doesn't have a cloud environment, and I have to install it on-premises. I have to come back to my premises or location to log in. If I am somewhere else dealing with a client, and one of my previous clients tells me they are having issues with one of the PCs or servers, I cannot do anything from where I am. I have to get back to my office to be able to log in.
Dimitri V G - PeerSpot reviewer
Maximizing operational efficiency with comprehensive monitoring and automation capabilities
There are areas in N-able N-central that could be improved. We always started it from the basic purpose of monitoring hardware, where vendors such as HP and Dell try to sell their own services which monitor and provide a dashboard, which is their logic. They want to make their own recurring revenue on that. We notice that SNMP has had a good run and still sometimes is used, but it's becoming an issue to maintain the same capabilities because HP makes it unreliable or even removes certain features that we used to be able to validate redundant array of independent disks. Our service that has been running for 15-20 years suddenly is not working anymore because HP decided in generation 10 plus and above, or generation 10 hardware in servers, storage controllers particularly, they just didn't put the SNMP OIDs anymore. We are now following that market change or business change in hardware monitoring and the future is Redfish, REST API, IPMI type of monitoring with the REST API and Redfish being most common. We have to do the effort ourselves because Enable is not really strategically going there because I assume there's not much money to make to improve that or to convince customers to start with their product. That issue could be better if they would be more prepared for that change and give us customers more tools, preconfigured, pre-available custom services for Redfish, REST API, where we just have to put a few items username, password and address and some dots and commas, but that we don't have to reinvent the wheel, which we are doing at the moment. We are using HP iLO commandlets and REST APIs for Aruba. Dell is making it very hard to monitor their hardware. If it has an iDRAC, I can manage it and monitor it, but if it's something that's less common or due to the portfolio, they have done a good job at not exposing information about health. We would just want to have a red or a green dot that indicates if this device is healthy or not healthy. Since nobody's investing in SNMP because it's a liability in security, they should invest in making a REST API and preferably also do the work on making it easy to pull or push information. That's something that the industry in general and Enable in particular could do a significant job to help us monitor.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We like the auto containment feature."
"The management feature is very good. You get a complete and clear view of the employment tool on Linux, Mac, and Windows operating systems (even on mobile). Third-party integration is also possible (e.g., IBM, Apple, etc.)."
"The most valuable features of Comodo RMM are the security antivirus and the ability to use other applications like the PSA and the ticketing system on one dashboard."
"It's a very robust product. They're continuing to invest and put new enhancements into the product. They're very open about what their roadmap is, which is very good for us because then as a business, we can plan."
"The most valuable feature of N-able N-central is the many options it has."
"N-able N-central has numerous good features. The asset tracking capability is powerful, allowing you to track hardware and software on devices connected to your network. The remote control is smooth, securely enabling remote access to servers and routers. It can be integrated with ticketing systems and other tools like CrowdStrike and N-able EDR for comprehensive network monitoring and security. The automation feature is handy, allowing you to schedule tasks, respond to system triggers, and automate problem resolution, such as handling disk space issues automatically."
"I like the remote connectivity, reporting suite, and patch management module."
"The support is at a good level. So normally, we can always get to a solution when we are stuck with some monitoring problems that we encounter."
"N-able N-central is very scalable."
"The solution's service is good."
"N-able N-central is an easy tool to implement with customers."
 

Cons

"Comodo RMM is really, really slow to load, and connecting with most of my clients takes a while."
"They should integrate email security in the same solution."
"The solution needs further integration with other software tools like a CRM and other accounting tools. Not having this integration makes Comodo RMM limited in functionality. Additionally, more network management features would be good to have in the next release."
"N-able N-central could improve the remote access, my technicians have complained about it. They have used other free tools instead to compensate, such as TeamViewer. Additionally, when using remote access on the web, it is lacking reports."
"The industry has moved towards Redfish for out-of-band and in-band monitoring, yet N-able N-central still relies on older protocols like SNMP."
"We have to do the effort ourselves because Enable is not really strategically going there because I assume there's not much money to make to improve that or to convince customers to start with their product."
"At this moment, we encounter stability issues with N-able N-central from time to time."
"Involving AI in the platform could improve it further."
"The support from our direct team is very good, but the support from their day-to-day ongoing help desk isn't that good. They have still got some work to do on that, but they have been focusing on that a lot over the last number of years. So, it has gotten a lot better than it was."
"The integration with other applications could be better."
"N-central has limited mobile device management (MDM) support, specifically for Android devices. This limitation affected a deal with a client who had numerous Android devices to manage. It would be beneficial if N-central could expand its MDM support to include Android devices."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing and licensing are average, almost six out of ten."
"N-able N-central is not an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) solutions are best for your needs.
863,564 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Performing Arts
6%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Comodo RMM?
The most valuable features of Comodo RMM are the security antivirus and the ability to use other applications like the PSA and the ticketing system on one dashboard.
What needs improvement with Comodo RMM?
Comodo RMM is really, really slow to load, and connecting with most of my clients takes a while. You have to get back to your office before you have to be able to work effectively, which is a drawb...
What is your primary use case for Comodo RMM?
Comodo RMM is a very good product. I've used it with one of my daycare clients, and we connect quite right. When they have an issue, for me to support it takes a longer time.
What needs improvement with N-able N-central?
There are areas in N-able N-central that could be improved. We always started it from the basic purpose of monitoring hardware, where vendors such as HP and Dell try to sell their own services whic...
What is your primary use case for N-able N-central?
My use cases for N-able N-central always start with hardware monitoring, but since Enable expanded its portfolio, it's always getting more and more options and use cases. Sometimes we start with th...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SolarWinds N-central, SolarWinds MSP N-central
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

76BITS, Aquaflam, Convey2Web
Premier Technology Solutions
Find out what your peers are saying about Comodo RMM vs. N-able N-central and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
863,564 professionals have used our research since 2012.