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

N-able N-central vs Pulseway 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

N-able N-central
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Pulseway
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (54th), Server Monitoring (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) category, the mindshare of N-able N-central is 8.9%, down from 12.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pulseway is 1.5%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
N-able N-central8.9%
Pulseway1.5%
Other89.6%
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Naman Bali - PeerSpot reviewer
Excellent monitoring features and great workflow
The solution has great workflow and server modules. From there, you can monitor your active directory, exchange server, Windows roles, and even Linux-based solutions. They provide a lot of features; it's good and easy software. I like the network feature which allows the addition of router switches and the ability to update variables. I'm able to build some SNMP OIDs to check on the monitoring status of network devices. At the time of patch management, you can also update your software for third-party softwares. You can select the application as well as customize your own application and install them on the PulseWay dashboard. Compared to other solutions, Pulseway is straightforward and easy to set up.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the remote connectivity, reporting suite, and patch management module."
"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."
"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."
"N-able N-central is an easy tool to implement with customers."
"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 most valuable feature of N-able N-central is the many options it has."
"N-able N-central is very scalable."
"The most valuable features of N-central are its ease of deployment and ease of use."
"It gives you remote control and has a mobile app."
"The solution has great workflow and server modules."
"It has been very helpful to get notifications about various issues with my servers and network to help me take action to resolve problems before they become major issues."
"The setup is simple."
"We like the patching of the window updates in the client's systems. You can automatically do updates with a single click."
 

Cons

"There is room for improvement in the development of custom monitoring services."
"Involving AI in the platform could improve it further."
"At this moment, we encounter stability issues with N-able N-central from time to time."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"They have good technical support but it's not excellent."
"It would be nice if it also had a desktop application, similar to the phone app, which would allow me to monitor and control computers from my desktop."
"The solution does not allow you to make a script for just one customer."
"There are some bugs or glitches."
"GUI needs to be improved and the solution lacks a process for monitoring VOIP calls."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing and licensing are average, almost six out of ten."
"N-able N-central is not an expensive solution."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Performing Arts
6%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
12%
Educational Organization
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Real Estate/Law Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Premier Technology Solutions
Dell, Canon, Siemens, Harvard University, Northwestern University
Find out what your peers are saying about N-able N-central vs. Pulseway and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.