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

Cisco DNA Center vs Pulseway 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

Cisco DNA Center
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
18th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (1st), Network Automation (2nd)
Pulseway
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
55th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (17th), Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco DNA Center is 1.0%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pulseway is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco DNA Center1.0%
Pulseway0.4%
Other98.6%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Mahir Öztürk - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Engineer at NGN Bilgi ve İletişim Hizmetleri
Client history has helped resolve past network issues more efficiently
I mostly use the client history feature of Cisco DNA Center. I didn't use the real-time monitoring capability of Cisco DNA Center because I primarily used it for client history regarding issues and problems. I don't use it for real-time monitoring. If there is a problem, I can inspect the situation and see what is happening, which is beneficial.
reviewer2132892 - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at Hogan's Systems Consulting, LLC
Great notifications, a wide variety of features, and excellent monitoring capabilities
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. It's nice to be able to do things remotely using my phone; however, in many cases, it would be very helpful to be able to do things from a desktop or laptop computer. This would be especially useful for things like remote access to computers. It's too hard to do much on a Windows computer using a tiny phone screen. Being able to do things from a desktop or laptop computer would be much more productive.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration."
"We can monitor all devices and get the required information using the product."
"It does a lot of things automatically, and that's the big thing with it. They're making the software so that you don't need to be as knowledgeable as me on the switching and routing side to get your work done. If you want, you can have DNA troubleshoot your problem for you and give you solutions or fix it itself, if it was something that's just a configuration issue."
"I like that we can easily configure any new hardware. It's also easy to deploy and easy to troubleshoot."
"Automation helps configure devices without manual intervention, enabling zero-touch provisioning."
"Cisco DNA Center provides operational support, compliance support, security vulnerability detection, and automatic scheduling."
"People like to use the dashboards to get an overview of their network."
"The best feature of Cisco DNA Center is the visibility page, where you can see everything on the dashboard, and you don't have to be a technical person to view the issues."
"It gives you remote control and has a mobile app."
"We like the patching of the window updates in the client's systems. You can automatically do updates with a single click."
"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."
"The solution has great workflow and server modules."
 

Cons

"The cost is very high."
"There are some software problems from version to version. It takes a long time for DNA Center to recognize the video and control access devices."
"The solution’s security side could be improved."
"The solution's integration feature can be better."
"The features of Cisco DNA Center and Cisco Prime could have more parity."
"Cisco DNA Center was a new technology for us, at the beginning, it was not easy to do, but Cisco did a lot of training with us to a level we could handle everything. The team is managing itself now without the assistance of Cisco."
"The weaknesses primarily involve pricing and the ongoing need for increased bandwidth and data throughput."
"From the recent DNA point of view, there are some stability challenges with Cisco, but very minor."
"There are some bugs or glitches."
"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."
"GUI needs to be improved and the solution lacks a process for monitoring VOIP calls."
"They have good technical support but it's not excellent."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The partnership price is notably high, but it ultimately depends on the chosen business model."
"Cisco DNA Center is a licensed product with multiple levels of licensing available such as basic, advanced, and essential. I don't have the exact figure, but Cisco DNA Center is costly. For example, the box has information about the essential license and costs a considerable amount of money. You need to pay extra to use advanced features in Cisco DNA Center. My company sees Cisco DNA Center as a solution that's worth the money, which is why it invested in the solution. If you want centralized management for your network, especially when upgrading it, Cisco DNA Center is perfect, but it's more suitable for a large-scale rather than a small-scale network."
"It is an expensive solution."
"We get a yearly license at the time we buy the product."
"The tool's licensing may not come across as something that may be friendly for users."
"The tool is medium-priced."
"The product is very costly."
"We have a three-year license with them."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
10%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Educational Organization
8%
Government
8%
Real Estate/Law Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise25
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco DNA Center?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco DNA Center?
After evaluating other solutions, we will provide feedback.
What needs improvement with Cisco DNA Center?
In my opinion, the client history in Cisco DNA Center can be longer than 10 days, perhaps extending to 15 or 20 days. I am using it in a huge factory in Turkey, and sometimes I need to see what occ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

DNA Center
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Dell, Canon, Siemens, Harvard University, Northwestern University
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco DNA Center vs. Pulseway and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.