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

ConnectWise Automate vs N-able N-central comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

ConnectWise Automate
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
10th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
N-able N-central
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) category, the mindshare of ConnectWise Automate is 5.5%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of N-able N-central is 5.4%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
N-able N-central5.4%
ConnectWise Automate5.5%
Other89.1%
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
 

Featured Reviews

MikeChacker - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager Global Service Delivery at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Facilitates valuable patch cycles, but the web client is not very intuitive and needs updating, and the scripting has room for improvement
The fixed client for Automate is slow. The web client is not very intuitive. It could use some updating and some thought around the UX. Also, with the scripting, I would like to see something where it could have third-party scripts already pre-built, and all you have to do is say, "Hey, I need this," and go load it. It's not as automated as I'd like it to be.
Dimitri V G - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Manager Fiber & Backhaul Solutions Center & South at Telenet BVBA
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

"This product saves us a lot of time and increases our efficiency."
"Remote access and detailed monitoring help us support our equipment."
"The reporting on the product is great."
"A good automated scripts feature."
"The solution is very stable; it's reliable, there are no bugs and glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze."
"Maybe they could improve the capability to be multi-tenant."
"Their premium support is great."
"It's definitely improved the help-desk servicing, et cetera."
"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 features of N-central are its ease of deployment and ease of use."
"The most helpful features of N-able N-central include providing a single pane of glass for many insights in an environment regarding their patching, their assets, their devices in general, and the active issues that they show."
"I like the remote connectivity, reporting suite, and patch management module."
"The most valuable feature of N-able N-central is the many options it has."
"The transition to N-able N-central was very smooth; we were confident that our migration would not affect any operations, and it was easy to migrate our clients into the new solutions."
"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."
"The solution's service is good."
 

Cons

"I know we get some false positives at times, where things report offline and then when we connect to them with control they're connectable."
"Because of the vast number of features, the software is difficult to navigate."
"In Patch Manager, there should be more reportability so that it is easier to see the updates that I have applied to a machine and when the next update will happen. A lot of times, it seems like all the information is kind of thrown all over the place, and you can't really see it all at the same time. There should be a simplified patch data view that allows us to quickly confirm that our various clients are getting patched as they should be."
"They always change the GUI to some dumb-down version of tiles which are more "user-friendly", but slows my team down in the end."
"This is a raw system. Of course, it has some flaws that could be improved. But, it's something that we will have to work with to get to the point where we need this, we request it and they do their best to make it happen."
"Patching and reporting need improvements, especially reporting. The reporting engine is quite outdated, so you end up having to use your own dashboard."
"The menu doesn't always load properly."
"The fixed client for Automate is slow. The web client is not very intuitive."
"It was previously expensive and tedious to manage different licenses."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the development of custom monitoring services."
"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."
"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."
"At this moment, we encounter stability issues with N-able N-central from time to time."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing and licensing are reasonable."
"I pay $85 a month per user for a ConnectWise package that contains multiple solutions."
"From what I've overheard, it is pretty comparable to other solutions in terms of price."
"I believe Automate is available for around $2."
"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.
914,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
8%
Performing Arts
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise1
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with N-able N-central?
The MSP part of N-able N-central has evolved over the years. They have been trying to move from professional or network server and desktop licensing to make it more comprehensive. With professional...
What is your primary use case for N-able N-central?
We have been dealing with Enable EDR and N-able N-central, which is a management center. It's the NOC solution that we are currently running our asset management on. We are managing tasks in that e...
What advice do you have for others considering N-able N-central?
There's a new node for N-able N-central which they have addressed. Our outstanding items include reviewing our pricing and partnership level, which can provide additional benefits when we exceed 10...
 

Also Known As

LabTech for IT Service Providers, ConnectWise Automate for Corporate IT Departments, ConnectWise Automate for IT Service Providers
SolarWinds N-central, SolarWinds MSP N-central
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

I-M Technology, Mainstay Technologies, PC Works Plus, Integrity IT, Kerkhoff Technologies Inc., Marathon Consulting, Christenberry Sales Company, EDTS, Secom Technology, Ready to View, ARRC Technology, DaVinci Digital, JNR Networks, Quinn Technology Solutions, PCIT, Liberty Technology, Capital Computers & Networks, Atlanta Technology Force, Doberman Technologies, First Column Enterprises, CisCom Solutions
Premier Technology Solutions
Find out what your peers are saying about ConnectWise Automate vs. N-able N-central and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.