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

Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs Zenoss Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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 IT Infrastructure Monitoring
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
194
Ranking in other categories
Network Troubleshooting (2nd), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (2nd)
Zenoss Cloud
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
77th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
54th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
40th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (33rd), Event Monitoring (14th), Server Monitoring (23rd), Container Monitoring (10th), AIOps (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is 0.9%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zenoss Cloud is 0.4%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

HardeepSingh2 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
ClaudiaChen - PeerSpot reviewer
Generates close to real-time alerts so users can resolve issues, but needs more integration and public cloud monitoring features
As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The traffic insights and the configuration management are the most valuable features."
"There are times when we inherit issues from whatever company we acquire, and deploying Auvik Network Management on a site and having it map everything that it can find and pull down all of the configuration is absolutely amazing for network discovery."
"We have backup connectivity in case of some failures. So, it has been of some help. Our mean time to resolution has been decreased by half an hour."
"The backup and remote control feature of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is my favorite. It is pretty easy to use."
"The automated mapping or alerting has impacted our daily operations since now we receive alerts directly to email. We don't have to wait to to get a notice from the clients."
"The most valuable features for me are network monitoring and alerting."
"I like the information Auvik provides you about switches that helps you troubleshoot connectivity issues between clients and switches. It's much easier to locate where the problem is on the network. We were using N-central for our RMM. Unfortunately, that doesn't map out the switches. It tells us what is up or down but doesn't do a good job of network troubleshooting like Auvik does."
"It's all intuitive and straightforward. The out-of-the-box alerts provided everything I needed, but I've made a couple of additional alerts. You can schedule maintenance windows in Auvik, and the solution won't send any alerts during that time."
"The custom built integration is one of the most valuable features because you can see all the especially critical items."
"It's easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible discovery mechanism."
"What I like most about Zenoss Service Dynamics is that it monitors the devices and gives close to real-time alerts. For example, in case the device is not available, Zenoss Service Dynamics generates an alert so my team can resolve the issue."
"The product offers good documentation that helps with initial training."
"Its Docker Container concept is mind blowing. It is the first monitoring tool which comes with Docker features."
"They have also accommodated many state-of-the-art technologies like Docker and ZooKeeper."
 

Cons

"They can definitely build more alerts."
"It needs flexibility for the pooling of information. Because it is fully automated, it is pooling everything from the device from a given category. There is no way to exclude things that are not important or if you want to temporarily remove them to see statistics of other things. For example, we get about 100 MB from Auvik. We are unable to limit this. We would rather stop monitoring something, since some features will always give you alerts, because they shouldn't be monitored. However, it is impossible to exclude them, e.g., the internal interface. If somebody disconnects the device from the internal interface, we get an alert. So, this is something that is really painful for us. More flexibility would solve most of our issues."
"It is amazing in keeping device inventories up-to-date. It mostly keeps them up to date as things change. There were a couple of hiccups where a device would get replaced and the mapping would break, and we'd have to go in and fix the mapping. It was with devices that Auvik couldn't fully discover or devices that would change frequently, such as cell phones or other devices on the network that are dynamic and change all the time. The integration would just show up with an IP address and a MAC address. There was no other information in them, which wasn't very helpful. They were the devices that Auvik wasn't able to discover fully. If they had full SNMP or SSH credentials and Auvik knew what the device was and it was matched correctly in Auvik, then Auvik could push it through."
"They may need to add some more integration pieces with different vendors. For example, API keys aren't available for certain vendors. While everything that I have works with Auvik and gets monitored by it, there are a few network items I have that I would like to see deeper integration with..."
"If I could make a wish list of things that I would like to see from Auvik, I would definitely love to see more vendor integration with specific manufacturers. They've got that integration with Cisco, but it would be awesome to also have that with other major brands, such as HP, Dell, and Lenovo. It should have integration with more vendors, and in general, being able to quickly and easily access vendor-specific tools from the portal would be amazing."
"The global dashboard needs work, and I'm not the only one saying this."
"The biggest area for improvement is the speed of the website because it's not something we host. Each of our clients hosts an agent that gathers the logs and pushes it up. The website can be slow to click around in or click through."
"I found the search feature somewhat frustrating. For example, let's say I'm searching for an IP address. Even though this thing exists, it doesn't do a good job of showing it to me."
"As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor."
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
"There is room for improvement with the administrative part. They introduced Control Center to manage things in Zenoss 5. The services that Zenoss provides remained the same, but the administrative part, since they introduced Docker, etc., has become a little complex"
"The AI aspect needs to improve."
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
"The inclusion of a feature to show a graphical view of the network would be a helpful improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Auvik is expensive, but given how much we use it and how many hours it is saving over the year, it is justified."
"Auvik charges based on the number of network devices being used."
"While the price is high, we are getting a lot of features for our money."
"I can't speak to the cost; I'm an engineer. Auvik has a subscription-based pricing option, and the other solution we evaluated had high upfront costs."
"I believe that our bill is somewhere around the $600 range per month. We're monitoring about 63 machines. Most of them are servers. So, $10 to monitor it for an entire month is amazing. You couldn't get somebody in India for that cheap."
"Its licensing is very fair. The devices that stand to gain the most benefit from this product are the ones that are billed. In the case of routers, switches, and firewalls, I won't necessarily have the ability to put a management agent on them to gather errors and activity logs. This type of solution is a requirement for me to properly monitor and manage these devices. The devices that aren't being billed are workstation servers, etc. For those devices, I can put agents on them to monitor their health. It has a fair billing structure."
"Auvik is affordable. The license was under $4,000 annually for our setup. That covers a lot of switches, firewalls, and integration. It was well worth the price. I think it's around $20 per device per quarter."
"I do not have a whole lot of information on the pricing, but our pricing seems to be okay. Internally, we have not had any issues with it, so we have not had the need to discuss pricing."
"It depends on the customer, what he wants."
"There are additional costs you'll have to pay apart from the license fee for Zenoss Service Dynamics. I can't remember exactly how much my company is paying because I don't handle the finance part, but the cost is paid annually. On a scale of one to five, with one being the cheapest and five being the most expensive, I'm rating the solution three out of five."
"It is very cost-effective compared to the tools I worked with in the past. The company is gaining a lot with respect to the cost factor. It provides agentless monitoring and in a very cheap way."
"The pricing depends on the environment, the number of services, and the size of the data center. It can go from $100,000 to a million dollars."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
24%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
I do not know anything about the pricing of Auvik Network Management. Our CEO handles all of that part of the business. I assume it is not crazy. I know it is on a per-switch basis or per-device ba...
What needs improvement with Auvik?
Auvik's network map is easy to use for someone who is experienced, but if someone is not too experienced with it, they might be overwhelmed, especially if they run a really big client network with ...
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
In my experience, I worked with many monitoring software, but the one that gave me the most functionalities of a large-scale company is Zenoss, due to its ability to monitor completely hybrid and a...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Cloud Monitoring, Zenoss Service Dynamics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
2degrees, Rackspace, State of North Dakota, El Paso Independent School District, NWN Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Zenoss Cloud and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.