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

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs Corelight 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

Cisco Secure Network Analytics
Ranking in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)
4th
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (37th), Cisco Security Portfolio (9th)
Corelight
Ranking in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA)
7th
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
12th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Network Detection and Response (NDR) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is 5.9%, down from 7.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Corelight is 4.1%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Detection and Response (NDR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco Secure Network Analytics5.9%
Corelight4.1%
Other90.0%
Network Detection and Response (NDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Muhammad Harun-Owr-Roshid - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at BRIGHT-i SYSTEMS LIMITED
Have streamlined network visibility and troubleshooting while seeing benefits from AI integration
In terms of improvements for Cisco Secure Network Analytics, from the implementation point of view, now that AI is in use, some other features need to be upgraded considering AI solutions. Proper management of the database is also important; it should be centralized for easier data collection from a single database. When precise manual analysis is needed, it's sometimes difficult, so having a centralized database will allow network admins to find actual scenarios more effectively, especially since some information may not be visible on the GUI. Cisco should upgrade their hardware part to run the database, because sometimes it cannot handle the load while all features are running in the network. The database management should indeed be centralized because while AI runs behind the systems, central management is essential. For example, in a network with 100 Cisco switches, a few routers, firewalls, and access points, all data generated should be preserved in a central database. This approach simplifies management and analysis for troubleshooting, as GUI interfaces may not always provide visible information. Centralizing the database will allow for better understanding of which information is preserved for each specific device.
HamadaElewa - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Sales Manager at Spire Solutions
An expensive solution to monitor internet traffic with multiple dashboards
The huge library especially the open source link, makes it the main engine for Corelight with some enhancements in the commercial version. It has a very powerful level, such as signature-based attacks or behavioral attacks, with enhancements in the design. It is very flexible for intelligent implementations like IPs, especially between big companies and banks. Corelight is easy to understand and monitor what is going on behind the team. The solution is already integrated with other systems like Suricata, Elastic, and Microsoft tools. It's very easy to integrate signature-based or behavior-based engines. You can use Elastic for the dashboards to get it from Corelight, along with all the benefits and expandability.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has definitely helped us improve our mean time to resolution on network issues."
"Using the Cognitive Analytics feature, we have complete visibility that we didn’t have before."
"Stealthwatch has greatly improved our network visibility, in terms of bandwidth, malware, and PCI violations."
"The solution has increased our threat detection rate. Cisco Stealthwatch has not reduced our incident response times. It has not reduced the amount of time it takes us to detect immediate threats. It has reduced false positives."
"It has improved our internal knowledge of what's going on with the network, and that's helpful."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its reporting and mitigation capabilities."
"There are already many functionalities, so I don't think there is anything to improve."
"The solution's analytics and thrust detection capabilities are good. We're still adjusting it. It's a little hypersensitive, but it is working right now."
"It's an easy way for us to get visibility in a client's environment."
"The most valuable feature is the embedded IDS from Suricata."
"It is easy to deploy and easy to handle."
"It's easy to create additional dashboards specific to supporting specific tasks."
"Corelight is easy to use."
 

Cons

"Initially, I felt Cisco Secure Network Analytics lacked integration with Splunk."
"The initial setup was straightforward but required a lot of data entry, to begin with building out the server types and network types."
"The initial setup is complex, as there is a lot to configure."
"We are continuing down the road of ACI and ISE with Cisco, so we would like to see the continuation of Stealthwatch integrating into ISE for exchange of information, and also, more into the ACI environment too."
"The solution should have the ability to analyze security events not only at the network layer but also at the application and OS layers."
"The version with the Dell server had iDRAC problems. Often, it reported iDRAC failure."
"We've had problems with element licensing costs so scalability is a concern."
"I would like Cisco to make it easier for the administrators to use it."
"The solution’s architecture is complex and difficult to understand. There are multiple machines and VMs."
"Corelight hasn’t added features in a long time."
"Machine learning could be a good improvement, but it's very costly."
"In the next release, building a graphical user interface would be helpful."
"They can enhance the interface of the product. They can make it more interactive and also easier to use for feature access."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is done by flows per second, not including outside>in traffic."
"Pricing is much higher compared to other solutions."
"NetFlow is very expensive."
"Our fees are approximately $3,000 USD."
"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."
"The tool is not cheaply priced."
"The yearly licensing cost is about $50,000."
"We pay for support costs on a yearly basis."
"It's a yearly fee and depends on what you are looking for."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Detection and Response (NDR) solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Real Estate/Law Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise52
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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?
In terms of improvements for Cisco Secure Network Analytics, from the implementation point of view, now that AI is in use, some other features need to be upgraded considering AI solutions. Proper m...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Stealthwatch?
Our customers mainly use Cisco Secure Network Analytics to get whole network visibility and easy troubleshooting to find actual problems and also to mitigate loopholes or findings immediately to pr...
What is the biggest difference between Corelight and Vectra AI?
The two platforms take a fundamentally different approach to NDR. Corelight is limited to use cases that require the eventual forwarding of events and parsed data logs to a security team’s SIEM or ...
What do you like most about Corelight?
It's easy to create additional dashboards specific to supporting specific tasks.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Corelight?
The solution is too expensive compared to others. If you have the technical knowledge, it's good. Corelight is a very big gap between you and others if you’re new.
 

Also Known As

Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF
Education First
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs. Corelight and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.