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

Aruba IntroSpect vs Cisco Secure Network Analytics comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 6, 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

Aruba IntroSpect
Ranking in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)
14th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (24th)
Cisco Secure Network Analytics
Ranking in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (33rd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (5th), Cisco Security Portfolio (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) category, the mindshare of Aruba IntroSpect is 3.4%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is 9.0%, down from 14.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Network Analytics9.0%
Aruba IntroSpect3.4%
Other87.6%
Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)
 

Featured Reviews

Marko Pirc - PeerSpot reviewer
IP Network Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Key features are roaming, application control and the firewall
We are partners of Aruba as well as sellers and customers. My job in the company is IP network engineer.  The roaming is a feature that works very well. In addition, the application control and firewall features are very good. These are all important features and make the product a valuable one.…
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The roaming is a feature that works very well, and the application control and firewall features are very good, making the product a valuable one."
"Roaming feature, application control and firewall features."
"I haven't heard of any issues with stability."
"The most valuable feature is the end-user monitoring, and if there is any abnormal behavior on the machine, the administrator will be alerted."
"The ability to send data flow from other places and have them all in one place is very valuable for us."
"The artifacts available in the tool provide better information for analyzing network traffic. It enables a holistic view of network traffic and general packet analysis. It's easy to identify anomalies without the use of signatures. The way in which we implemented Stealthwatch Cloud has enabled my team to analyze traffic behind proxies."
"The solution has been beneficial because it's cut down the amount of time involved in doing complex scenarios and research."
"It works efficiently for encrypted traffic analysis."
"Most of the engineers I've worked with have been really good. Very knowledgeable and easy to work with."
"Visibility. The ability to look East and West. To see what is passing through your circuits, where it is coming from, and how big it is."
"I believe this solution has saved our organization a lot of time, money, and administrative work."
"This solution has improved my organization because when I have users who are having issues with patching slowness it gives me the ability to be able to proactively troubleshoot and determine what the issue is."
 

Cons

"The dashboard could be simplified. You don't have a clear cut view and you have to dive deep into the options to gain some understanding."
"I would like to see improvements made to the dashboard, where you can get the information with a simple click."
"Technical support is unfortunately a little slow."
"The packet analyzer needs improvement."
"Cisco Stealthwatch is scalable with money. It's expensive."
"Cisco could improve the administration for the customers."
"Several features often look very promising during evaluation or implementation but end up being used only lightly in day-to-day operations."
"The version with the Dell server had iDRAC problems. Often, it reported iDRAC failure."
"Its granularity for RBAC roles-based access control needs improvement."
"One update I would like to see is an agent-based client. Currently StealthWatch is network based."
"This solution is a little expensive."
"I'm not really sure it gives us a true picture."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license is based on the number of users. The evaluation license is free, you can download it from the website and try it out first."
"Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"One of the things which bugs me about Lancope is the licensing. We understand how licensing works. Our problem is when we bought and purchased most of these Lancope devices, we did so with our sister company. Somewhere within the purchase and distribution, licensing got mixed up. That is all on Cisco, and it is their responsibility. They allotted some of our sister company's equipment to us, and some of our equipment to them. To date, they have never been able to fix it."
"Licensing is done by flows per second, not including outside>in traffic."
"Our fees are approximately $3,000 USD."
"It has a subscription model. There is yearly support, and there is also three-year support. It depends on what the customers want."
"​Licensing is done by flows per second, not including outside (in traffic)."
"Pricing is much higher compared to other solutions."
"The solution is expensive. It costs several hundred thousand dollars per year (depending on how many flows you are collecting)."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aruba IntroSpect?
Aruba Introspect has two licenses - advanced and standard. While we found the price of the advanced license to be a bit high, the standard license is reasonably priced and costs less than half the ...
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...
 

Also Known As

IntroSpect
Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage Hotel, Centara Hotels and Resorts, Asda, The Dolder Grand,
Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba IntroSpect vs. Cisco Secure Network Analytics and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.