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

Flowmon vs LogRhythm NetMon 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

Flowmon
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
42nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Network Detection and Response (NDR) (15th)
LogRhythm NetMon
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
56th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Flowmon is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LogRhythm NetMon is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Pifu Lin - PeerSpot reviewer
Quick identification of network issues enhances performance monitoring
We will try to Proof of Concept (POC) to a client in Taiwan. We just use the features for the Network Performance Monitor (NPM) Flowmon is more easy to understand and helps find network issues more quickly. We need this solution to monitor the network performance. We started using it three…
KeithGalleros - PeerSpot reviewer
A solution providing visibility into all data traversing your network but needs to be more cost-efficient
The main concern is that LogRhythm has not improved NetMon but instead introduced a separate product, which many customers, including us, would prefer to be integrated into a single platform for easier management. I'd also like to see LogRhythm NetMon improve in terms of cost efficiency, especially regarding adding new products that may overlap in functionality. Specifically, I would appreciate enhanced detection and response capabilities directly integrated into NetMon to avoid needing additional rules or tools from LogRhythm. Regarding integration capabilities, I think NetMon's current agent-based approach is limiting. Integrating with protocols like Gflow and Netflow would be better, allowing seamless integration with our existing network equipment. This would solve the problem of agent-based restrictions and improve overall integration.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Flowmon is more easy to understand and helps find network issues more quickly."
"The solution is stable."
"It is an open platform, so in terms of integration, we are quite happy. We can integrate it with other SNMP solutions. We can also integrate it with security solutions, such as a SIEM solution."
"The artificial intelligence and automatic detection system in Flowmon Solution are perfect for every, type of customer, such as government and commerce."
"Flowmon is more easy to understand and helps find network issues more quickly."
"NetMon's best feature is traffic analysis."
"It has a very strong artificial intelligence engine."
"The analytics feature is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the log, which can be analyzed by our SIEM solution."
"LogRhythm NetMon's most impressive feature is that it's a bundled package, so you're not just relying on monthly data; you get a six-month view for more comprehensive indicators of compromise. This dual approach is precious. We implement LogRhythm NetMon in our cybersecurity strategy mainly for compliance and correlation of network, user, and decision activities, particularly for network firewalls and access control."
"Visibility is a valuable feature, the ability to see even if the traffic is not going into the firewall"
"The initial setup is straightforward because we can deploy an open server."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"The licensing price could be better."
"If there was better visualization in Flowmon Solution it would be good."
"I do not know the detailed pricing."
"It would be helpful to have more details about the monitoring of the infrastructure. It should have support for SNMP. This is something that is currently not there in the product."
"The training for this product is not very good and needs to be improved."
"There is an issue with tunneling in relation to how the connectivity is established between the end devices and where NetMon is installed. On the console, I often observe that there's a difference of a few seconds or maybe a minute, and this lag time should not be there."
"LogRhythm NetMon's pricing model is an area of concern that should be made a little bit cheaper in comparison to the other players in the market currently."
"Could use a topology diagram which would help get an exact visual."
"I would like to see better integration with multiple products. Integration is not something that is readily available for most of the products."
"Sometimes it's hard to find the network devices' self-audit logs."
"Some of the automated tasks we can perform on QRadar cannot be performed on LogRhythm because the solution has limitations."
"The main concern is that LogRhythm has not improved NetMon but instead introduced a separate product, which many customers, including us, would prefer to be integrated into a single platform for easier management."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing fee accrues only once, but that of support is annual."
"It works with a permanent license, and then you can pay for the support. For the gold support, you need to pay yearly."
"The price of the solution could be better."
"Pricing is okay. There were some competitors that were extremely expensive and there were some which were really inexpensive but LogRhythm stayed in the middle of them."
"I don't have visibility into the pricing of LogRhythm NetMon as it's handled through our commercial partnerships."
"NetMon's licensing costs about $85k per year, with some extra costs for support."
"The price of this solution is too high, so it should be made more practical and more valuable for the customer."
"The product is expensive for smaller companies."
"LogRhythm's licensing part is something that depends on the license you want since they offer it on a perpetual and subscription basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
6%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
19%
Insurance Company
11%
Government
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Flowmon Anomaly Detection System?
I don't understand the price. I am in deployment, so I do not know the detailed pricing.
What is your primary use case for Flowmon Anomaly Detection System?
We will try to Proof of Concept (POC) to a client in Taiwan. We just use the features for the Network Performance Monitor (NPM).
What do you like most about LogRhythm NetMon?
It has a very strong artificial intelligence engine.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogRhythm NetMon?
I don't have visibility into the pricing of LogRhythm NetMon as it's handled through our commercial partnerships.
What needs improvement with LogRhythm NetMon?
The main concern is that LogRhythm has not improved NetMon but instead introduced a separate product, which many customers, including us, would prefer to be integrated into a single platform for ea...
 

Also Known As

Flowmon Anomaly Detection System
LogRhythm Network Monitor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SEGA
Sera-Brynn
Find out what your peers are saying about Flowmon vs. LogRhythm NetMon and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.