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

Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs Kaseya Traverse 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

Auvik Network Management (ANM)
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
2nd
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
203
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (3rd), Network Troubleshooting (1st), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (2nd)
Kaseya Traverse
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
80th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
51st
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaseya Traverse is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Auvik Network Management (ANM)1.2%
Kaseya Traverse0.5%
Other98.3%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

HardeepSingh2 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior operation command center Engineer at a real estate/law firm with 10,001+ employees
Centralized dashboard and real-time picture of the network improve efficiency
We have integrated Auvik Network Management with PRTG and our ServiceNow ticketing tool through API. It automatically creates notifications and sends them to Teams and our ticketing tool. It saves a lot of time. It saved 40% to 50% of our time. Auvik Network Management's network map, together with the dashboard, gives me a real-time picture of my network. It allows me to see the inventory under all sites and devices. My company has 55 sites. Whenever I want to go to a site, I can navigate the network path, and it provides me with the topology directly from source to destination. It shows all events, such as downtime or critical warnings, in an easy-to-use manner. It provides information about device interfaces, device bandwidth, latency, etc. I just need to click to view more detailed information. I have never found a scenario where Auvik Network Management did not allow me to find my site or any device. I can use global search to find my device or site and get the information easily. However, proper configuration within Auvik is critical for accurate reporting, covering all interfaces and their utilization. Using the automated documentation capabilities of Auvik Network Management is very easy. Over the last year, I have been continuously exploring this, finding that the API integration with our other platforms is straightforward, as it just requires configuration on both ends for proper communication. I didn't find any issue so far. It has been awesome. The network map dashboard of Auvik Network Management gives me full visibility into my network, making it easy to troubleshoot issues with inbuilt tools such as traceroute, ping, and SNMP. It helps diagnose problems quickly without having to type commands manually. Real-time performance insights from Auvik Network Management are very critical for my organization as we currently manage 55 sites with over 2,000 devices, and we need to keep track of numerous services such as Active Directory, DNS, and many protocols, so Auvik is essential as it consolidates everything on one dashboard. Auvik Network Management has decreased our mean time to resolution by 40% to 50%. It allows us to see traffic flow in real time without needing to guess. I can just log into the Auvik dashboard and quickly get results. Auvik Network Management helps my organization troubleshoot network issues proactively by providing alerts and monitoring. Instead of waiting for user feedback, we receive alerts on issues such as high latency or device failures directly on the dashboard. The impact of Auvik Network Management on reducing business disruptions related to network issues is significant. It reduces our downtime, improves security, and simplifies complex tasks into straightforward ones, making it the best tool for managing our complex network. We have configured multiple notification channels. We get alerts through email or integrated platforms such as Teams, which helps streamline communication. It makes it easy to collect information from various devices. We just need to configure the collector, IP addresses, and connections, and get approval from both ends. It creates a unique ID, and it can communicate with those devices.
AMMAR HUMAIDY HUSIN - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Consultant at a university with 11-50 employees
Automation increases efficiency, but pricing needs to be more competitive
Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpful for me as a customer. The issue always is the price, as we cannot beat most of our competitors on pricing alone. If a product is just nice to have, not essential like an antivirus, if it's not really competitive with pricing, we cannot sell it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Overall, I rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) a nine out of ten."
"I like how Auvik gives us a quick overview of the overall situation."
"I love that Auvik manages all of the credentials for me."
"The best feature of Auvik Network Management is simplicity. It is friendly to use."
"I don't worry about the scalability of the solution because it is quite a broad, scalable, modern platform."
"The ability to have visibility on a network to see the traffic and the ability to see if devices are misconfigured and if something changes in that configuration, are most valuable."
"The extensive personalization and customization options are great because it lets me do a lot. I can set up different permission structures, assign various staff members read-only access and others full access, and customize my notifications."
"I like the ability to see bandwidth utilization on all the interfaces, and the automatic configuration backups are also useful."
"Everything is running seamlessly on the solution, to the point where you don't see any gap."
"If I want to automate the management and maintenance of my server automatically, this product is a good use case for that."
"We have found the solution to be very flexible to our requirements. We have been able to configure it on-premise effectively when we were using less of the cloud."
"It's a simple and humble tool."
"Automating processes is crucial for me, so the automation part stands out."
"Kaseya Traverse is a very stable solution and very sustainable in terms of what the market wants, what is out there, price-wise and functionality features. They're quite competitive and they are always innovating."
"It is a pretty stable solution...It is a pretty stable solution."
"The remote support and data collection features are great."
 

Cons

"Implementing a configurable dashboard for the network map would enhance user experience in this regard."
"A room for improvement would be integration with our help desk system."
"Auvik's network map along with its dashboard gives a real-time picture of our network. However, if a device is unreachable, there is no indicator for that, at least from what I have seen. If it is offline, there is an indicator for that, but if it is unreachable, there is no indicator."
"They need to improve the reporting system. They still don't have a proper reporting system in Auvik. They have built a dashboard in Power BI using APIs, but they should build some sort of report within Auvik itself. If Auvik fixes the reporting or comes up with a good reporting module, it will change the game."
"I want to see improvement around backups; we had a case where we created a ticket for online support, and they were able to set up backups for one of our devices, but they were unwilling to do the same backup script with a different device. The script uses the same code, just a different model number, and the engineers weren't willing to add it to the other model."
"The actual adding of networks, systems, and everything like that is fairly easy, but the problem that I have is getting the metrics out. Specifically, if you go to the Auvik webpage, sign in, and go through the alerts and everything else, they don't offer any plasma display with a red light, green light, or stop light indicating this device is in an error state, down, etc. To get around this, we have to use their API. I had to code an entire interface to work around that lack of information."
"I would like to see improvement in terms of its integration with other applications and systems. I know that they are adding new systems. However, there is still work to be done there, such as integration with MS Teams. That is not working great for us."
"It uses SNMP in its discovery process and how it pulls in data. But today it doesn't have an SNMP trap facility so you can't have your infrastructure devices push alerts into Auvik. And that for us would be a big feature that we would like to see."
"Reporting is a bit difficult."
"In terms of what could be improved, we are innovating all the time, as well as having a look at different avenues so that the strategy follows the structure. I think the software is still a little bit too new to actually fully asses what it has."
"The tool needs to have some AI capabilities, which it lacks currently."
"However, the issue lies in the adequacy of the responses to my questions, which are usually not up to par."
"Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also."
"We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product."
"Improvement is needed in making it cheaper."
"Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to other products, Auvik's pricing is more feasible since you get all its features. You pay for licenses on a per network device basis. It monitors hypervisors, but does not bill for that. There are no additional costs, which is something that I like."
"Auvik is a good product and worth the premium price tag for a lot of people."
"I don't work in the finance department, so I'm not familiar with the pricing details; however, I know some clients declined Auvik due to the pricing, so they found it expensive. Other clients have adopted it, so they think it's worth the cost."
"I don't think Auvik's pricing should be based on device, which it is right now. I don't know what their market share is or how they compete with Domotz, but if they want to stay competitive, Auvik should have simpler pricing."
"For the size of our school, it is expensive, but I understand the reason behind the pricing."
"Auvik is significantly cheaper than what we were using before."
"I believe that Auvik is one of the most expensive tools, but it is also the best."
"It turns out they only charge for routers and switches!"
"The price depends on whether you are monitoring different applications, especially in bulk, and depends on what you're doing. If you're monitoring one endpoint, it will cost you 150 ZAR."
"The solution is not cheap, but it is not too expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Non Profit
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business141
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Auvik?
The most valuable feature for us in Auvik is the network topology.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Auvik?
Regarding the pricing of Auvik Network Management (ANM), I have a glimpse that it is affordable and manageable, not too expensive. I have seen bills of two or three customers, not more than that. I...
What needs improvement with Auvik?
While I do not see any significant areas in Auvik Network Management (ANM) needing improvement, one suggestion would be to make the SSH part easier or simplified. Currently, we have to go through a...
What needs improvement with Kaseya Traverse?
Improvement is needed in making it cheaper, of course. I am not emphasizing making it cheaper, however, it should be more competitive with other products. The product itself is very good and helpfu...
What is your primary use case for Kaseya Traverse?
If I want to automate the management and maintenance of my server automatically, this product is a good use case for that.
What advice do you have for others considering Kaseya Traverse?
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. As Kaseya sellers, we always promote Kaseya first. If the price is more competitive, then I think it will be better. It's a main pain point for us as a resel...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
UltiSat, Clear Concepts, nVidia, United States Postal Service, Cisco, Redbox, Spark Digital, People's Bank & Trust
Find out what your peers are saying about Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Kaseya Traverse and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.