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

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs Pico Corvil Analytics 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 Secure Network Analytics
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
33rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (5th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (6th), Cisco Security Portfolio (8th)
Pico Corvil Analytics
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
69th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is 0.9%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pico Corvil Analytics is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Network Analytics0.9%
Pico Corvil Analytics0.6%
Other98.5%
Network Monitoring Software
 

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.
Ted Hruzd - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at AI Fit LLC
Helpful support agents, beneficial issue detection, and high availability
The creation of charts and real-time windows was somewhat cumbersome. The vendor's website had an application called App Agent that required improvement. This API was designed to track message rates between microservers ingested into a microservice memory map. It allowed users to monitor the number of transactions that occurred at specific points within the application, and it was quite impressive. However, it had some limitations, and it mainly served as a tool for basic tracking. The protocols it employed could reveal the type of server-to-server communication and the specific order types, but it was not able to provide a more in-depth analysis of the application. The vendor has the potential to integrate application metrics more extensively into their product suite. The product suite could benefit from more out-of-the-box predictive analytics capabilities, such as projecting market or symbol movements. However, it is unclear whether the vendor currently provides this functionality. Users may need to adjust their software to perform such analysis independently.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Ease of deployment, once you get your ducks in a row."
"The ability to send data flow from other places and have them all in one place is very valuable for us."
"It is a good application, providing for real-time monitoring of the organization of data. It can basically identify points of peak traffic where possible issues are being caused."
"The solution has been beneficial because it's cut down the amount of time involved in doing complex scenarios and research."
"The most valuable feature is its alerts and dashboard."
"The most valuable features are encrypted threat analysis and the ability to run jobs on entire flows."
"The beginning of any security investigation starts with net flow data."
"This solution has improved network visibility a lot."
"My advice is "Go for it." It's an amazing product."
"It is a market leader in latency detection and monitoring with extremely precise time stamping even over a wide area."
"Corvil is really useful, if you want to produce statistics for your application across different platforms then I would definitely recommend it."
"In terms of what it does, I'd give Corvil a ten out of ten; I've never seen a tool like it."
"Corvil is a great tool; it is the only one of the vendors that has 100% visibility into the market data stream."
"We use the data to analyze how much time we spend within the applications. Then, based on that, we are doing multiple analyses and types of investigations to work on reducing the amount of time spent on the latency, which helps our applications."
"Corvil definitely delivers a performance advantage for our firm over our competition because we are able to address all issues on a near real-time basis."
"The performance metrics are pretty good. We've got everything from the network layer to the actual application layer. We can see what's going on with things like sending time and batching."
 

Cons

"The interface is sluggish and not updated."
"The configuration of the solution was quite complex."
"I would like to see better filters."
"Improvements are needed on the application layer for complete security analysis."
"I would like to see more expansion in artificial intelligence and machine learning features."
"We had some trouble with the installation as we migrated from our previous solution."
"One update that I would like to see is an agent-based client. Currently, Stealthwatch is network-based. A local agent could help manage endpoints."
"We've had problems with element licensing costs so scalability is a concern."
"It is perceived as an expensive option, even in the financial services sector."
"There is definitely room for improvement in the reporting... The whole interface where you build reports and schedule them is very clunky and I find that, whereas on the GUI you can pull out all the metrics you want and it's very flexible and nice and easy to customize, the reporting is not very intuitive."
"Alerting isn't great... you can only put in one email address in. And that's for all kinds of alerting on the box."
"In terms of performance analysis, if you really want to dig down into the minutiae and get statistics on the important things... that would be the only piece lacking because, in our environment, we have thousands and thousands of symbols. With the architecture that Corvil is built on, it's cumbersome."
"With the architecture that Corvil is built on, it's cumbersome."
"Overall, the Corvil device needs a little bit of training for people to handle it. If that could be reduced and made more user-friendly, more intuitive, it would be better."
"I have seen errors where the CNE and the CMC haven't synced because of something missing in the CMC, which was there in the CNE. We would get some type of error, but it doesn't actually say what exactly was missing in the CNE."
"It's quite difficult to see, sometimes, how hard your Corvil is working. When we had a very busy feed that chucked out a lot of data it wasn't working very well on Corvil. We had to raise a case for it. It turned out to be that, in fact, we were overloading Corvil."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The yearly licensing cost is about $50,000."
"It is worth the cost."
"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."
"On a yearly basis, licensing is somewhere around $30,000."
"The licensing costs are outrageous."
"We pay for support costs on a yearly basis."
"Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"Corvil has reduced the time it takes us to isolate root causes."
"We bought a box from Corvil and it was $200,000 for one big CNE. Then there are obviously the recurring maintenance fees. The licensing is perpetual but the maintenance fees are not."
"I like the way they've decoupled the hardware now... Everything's based on the licensing side now. The way they do the packs is fair. It's very flexible in that we're not charged per decoder, we're charged for a certain pack. Whether we use one decoder or 20 decoders, as long as they're in the same pack, there's no extra charge. Expensive but fair is how I'd summarize it."
"As I am working more with Corvil, it looks like it is improving diagnostic times."
"The pricing is very expensive. Corvil could work on the pricing."
"Pico Corvil Analytics is expensive. There are several competitors in the market. Selling this solution to a trading firm might be challenging as there are several other solutions available that can perform basic similar operations, such as using Wireshark and Python scripts to obtain the required values. However, that does not nearly approach the comprehensive end-2-end automated depth of metrics and their correlations that Pico Corvil Analytics provides."
"It is pricey versus its competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise52
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
 

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?
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch
Corvil
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF
NASDAQ, Commerzbank, Pico Quantitative Trading, CME Group, Interactive Data, Tokyo Stock Exchange Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs. Pico Corvil Analytics and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.