No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.
reviewer2055258 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Admin at a media company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Jan 17, 2023
Has excellent discovery features and is easy to use, but the pricing model could be improved
Pros and Cons
  • "The SNMP discovery features are impressive; few products are as robust in their abilities, and it discovered objects I didn't think it would."
  • "The pricing model could also be improved, as the unlimited selection isn't unlimited. The billing work on the build devices and components, and I've tried to set up the solution in a few different configurations, resulting in multiple build devices each time. Therefore, I question the cost-effectiveness for a business of our size."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use Auvik for network discovery, visibility, management, and minor monitoring.

How has it helped my organization?

The solution's alerts led me to discover network aspects I wasn't aware of.

What is most valuable?

The SNMP discovery features are impressive; few products are as robust in their abilities, and it discovered objects I didn't think it would.

Auvik's management and monitoring functions are straightforward to use, though I'm tech-savvy, and this ease of use is important.  

The product increased visibility into our remote and distributed networks, and that's paramount to us.   

Auvik is a helpful tool for keeping device inventories up-to-date, which helps with delegation if the organization has the staff. 

Auvik keeping device inventories up-to-date saves time, as it's much more advantageous than having to do a facility tour in person, manually checking all the devices and adding them to s spreadsheet, for example. We do that for auditing purposes, but the solution makes keeping devices up-to-date much more manageable.  

What needs improvement?

The trial could be longer, especially for attracting small and medium-sized businesses like us.

The pricing model could also be improved, as the unlimited selection isn't unlimited. The billing work on the build devices and components, and I've tried to set up the solution in a few different configurations, resulting in multiple build devices each time. Therefore, I question the cost-effectiveness for a business of our size.

Buyer's Guide
Auvik Network Management (ANM)
June 2026
Learn what your peers think about Auvik Network Management (ANM). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: June 2026.
900,277 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for over a week on a trial basis. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution seems stable, though I haven't been using it for long enough to fully evaluate that. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Auvik seems scalable, and the initial deployment was straightforward. I can see how it would be difficult in a complex environment with multiple locations.

How are customer service and support?

I have never had to contact tech support thus far.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We didn't previously use a different third-party solution; we use what we built in-house or what's available as part of our equipment.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very straightforward; it took me less than an hour to deploy Auvik on our network. 

Compared to other solutions, Auvik is much faster to set up; it was almost immediately available for use following deployment.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

For small businesses with many devices, the tool is potentially unaffordable. Auvik Networks Inc. is competing with other companies offering very expensive products. Still, there's a gap in the market and potentially a lot of lost revenue for smaller customers, especially those with complex IT environments.

Auvik would be worth the money if we continued past the free trial if we were a bigger enterprise. From a value perspective, automation and related features could be very valuable.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

There are a few solutions on my list to evaluate, but I still need to get around to them.

What other advice do I have?

I rate the solution seven out of ten. 

I haven't had long enough to evaluate Auvik for its automation capabilities or to determine if there has been a reduction in our meantime to resolution. 

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Tim Merritt - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Enginer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Jan 17, 2023
Features excellent alert generation and visibility into networks but could be more intuitive and user-friendly
Pros and Cons
  • "The monitoring and alerting are the most valuable features."
  • "I've had some issues where the solution repeatedly discovers a device I don't want to manage and alerts me about it. This is probably me not using the tool correctly, or it could be Auvik recognizing the device in different ways."

What is our primary use case?

We are a managed service provider, so we use the solution to monitor our customers' network environments.

Auvik provides a single integrated platform for network monitoring, but we integrate with other platforms for ticket generation and another dashboard we use, BrightGauge. 

How has it helped my organization?

The alert generation is excellent; we need to be able to look at a customer's network and see if there are any issues we should be aware of, like emergencies and offline devices. Auvik provides this and alerts us to issues before the customer calls about the problem. We had a case where a device failed, the solution notified us right away, and we were able to use the automatic backup configuration, which we restored to a replacement device.

What is most valuable?

The monitoring and alerting are the most valuable features. 

The automated configuration backups are another excellent capability. 

Auvik provides excellent visibility into our remote and distributed networks, which is especially helpful when onboarding a new customer. The solution offers great insight into the network we're taking over from a single pane of glass. This gives us situational awareness, allowing us to address issues, find credentials, configure, and correctly monitor network elements.

What needs improvement?

The solution's monitoring and management functions are more challenging than needed; the interface is sometimes unintuitive and confusing. That may be because I've never had formal training with the tool, so it can be difficult to navigate sometimes. This can be frustrating, as I sometimes need to go back to square one and follow multiple steps to get back to where I've just come from. For example, to access a list of devices I was just looking at because there isn't a direct path back.

I've had some issues where the solution repeatedly discovers a device I don't want to manage and alerts me about it. This is probably me not using the tool correctly, or it could be Auvik recognizing the device in different ways.

The solution sometimes finds networks and devices it sees, but I don't know where to begin looking to try and find out where it could have seen these from. Therefore, I want to know the path or details about the discovery, where the tool discovers a new network, and what way it takes to get to it and find that it's available to scan.

I also want Auvik to identify itself differently on networks because we have some firewalls that identify it as a potential risk, not only because of what it's doing but also because Auvik can present like a foreign intrusion into the network, which scares some of our customers.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for almost two years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is excellent; we've never had a stability issue.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The tool scales well, though we have yet to push its limits. We can manage multiple customers, and it's a tenant-based solution, so Auvik is as scalable as we need it to be.

How are customer service and support?

I never had to contact tech support. 

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used MS Power Automate to monitor some of the devices we now use Auvik for, and Auvik does a better, more thorough job. We've also used the Kaseya VSA platform for monitoring. Still, Auvik is geared more towards the network, discovery, and monitoring aspects, which works better for us than other platforms.

How was the initial setup?

I wasn't involved in the initial deployment, though I've been involved in the deployments to some customers' networks. In terms of maintenance, there are specific tasks we carry out as part of our obligations as an MSP around monitoring Auvik, but we don't need to do any maintenance with Auvik itself.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm an engineer, so I'm unfamiliar with the cost of Auvik and the other options on the market. My advice to those concerned about pricing is to do their homework and compare all the offerings. They could also demo Auvik to see if it meets their needs and justifies the cost.

What other advice do I have?

I rate Auvik seven out of ten. 

A monitoring solution like Auvik is essential for any MSP, but other contenders exist in the marketplace.

Regarding reducing repetitive, low-priority tasks through automation, we're not currently using the solution for that. We could benefit from this area, but we have yet to leverage the capability.

As far as helping to keep device inventories up-to-date, I imagine the solution would help, but we don't use it for inventory.

As to whether the solution reduced our mean time to resolution (MTTR), I don't have access to those reports, but it's unlikely it impacts our resolution time. We don't continually monitor Auvik or have a staff member dedicated to working with it full-time. If we took advantage of the automation, I can see how the tool would reduce our MTTR, but we're not currently leveraging it as effectively as we could be.

My advice to others evaluating Auvik is they will need the hardware to run the collector at customer sites.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Other
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Auvik Network Management (ANM)
June 2026
Learn what your peers think about Auvik Network Management (ANM). Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: June 2026.
900,277 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Alan Parry - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Engineering at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
Real User
Jan 11, 2023
The monitoring and management functions couldn't be more straightforward, but it doesn't work with Tailscale
Pros and Cons
  • "Auvik has alerts that help you be proactive by telling you when something is behaving abnormally."
  • "We use a service called Tailscale, a peer-to-peer private networking tool. My biggest issue with Auvik was getting it to scan devices across the Tailscale network. I suspect it's not supported there. That would be a valuable extension for us."

What is our primary use case?

I run an engineering team with a dynamic cloud-based environment. I was interested in tools that can help me understand what we have deployed. 
There are about five people administrating it. In terms of the number of locations, it's hard to say. We're a distributed remote team, but we have multiple cloud environments. We don't have locations in the physical sense of the word anymore.

How has it helped my organization?

One of our core objectives is to understand the services and systems deployed in the cloud. It's not always obvious. I'm hopeful that Auvik will help.

Having a single platform is somewhat important. It's also essential to integrate Auvik with other solutions. However, I don't think there's a situation where one tool can be the single integrated platform within a space. I checked out the API and the integrations around that. It all looks good, but I didn't use it that much. I did some basic integrations, but I don't think having a single integrated portal product is everything. The right amount of features are integrated into Auvik, but it doesn't need to have everything integrated, and nothing ever will be fully integrated.

We use various tools, including our homebrewed management scripts, some monitoring tools, and cloud portals. They aren't all applications per se, but we have various overlapping tools. Switching to Auvik would save us some time, but some key hangups prevent us from proceeding with it. 

The automatic discovery would help us avoid repeated configuration steps. The automated device inventory feature is potentially valuable. Employees are expensive, and we want them focused on high-value tasks. 

Visibility is crucial. Auvik has alerts that help us be proactive by telling us when something is behaving abnormally. 

What is most valuable?

The automatic discovery feature is the most valuable, but I've got some issues. The monitoring and management functions are effortless. It couldn't be more straightforward. We use lots of tools, and they need to be as simple as possible. Auvik has an advantage there because I certainly would pick it over something else. However, we often find ourselves using functions that aren't so easy to use because we need them, and they're the only option available.

The network visualization was intuitive enough, but it's hard to say because the network I was testing had a reasonably flat structure. It was good for what I was doing, but I don't know how that scales.

What needs improvement?

We use a service called Tailscale, a peer-to-peer private networking tool. My biggest issue with Auvik was getting it to scan devices across the Tailscale network. I suspect it's not supported there. That would be a valuable extension for us.

For how long have I used the solution?

I haven't used Auvik for long. I did a demo for about a day where I set up the features and played with the interface extensively.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Auvik is highly stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I haven't stretched Auvik's capabilities, but it's been fine.

How are customer service and support?

I rate Auvik support a six out of ten. They were very responsive, but I didn't feel that the answer was quite accurate.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Neutral

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We had a mixture of cloud consoles and self-management scripts. I saw Auvik advertised and thought the automatic discovery sounded handy, so I took a free trial.

How was the initial setup?

I run the engineering team, so I wouldn't do the deployment, but I manage the people who would. It's pretty straightforward, and I implemented Auvik out of the box. It takes very little time to deploy. I could see devices within an hour. I spent most of the day playing with configurations, adding SNMP credentials, and exploring. I could get something running in half an hour to an hour. Auvik was much quicker to set up than some other tools. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I'm concerned about the price. It seems quite expensive.

What other advice do I have?

I rate Auvik a seven out of ten. Currently, it doesn't work for us because of the limitation on Tailscale. If it weren't for that, I would give it a perfect ten. Unfortunately, it doesn't meet our needs, so I can't score it too high.

The setup was smooth, and you can tell they've put a lot of thought into helping people with that. I'm curious why all the devices have API keys next to them when I know some devices don't have APIs. It wasn't clear what that meant. Maybe the way the APIs work could use a little bit of polish.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
PeerSpot user
reviewer2020080 - PeerSpot reviewer
Support engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Dec 11, 2022
Features excellent network mapping, detailed device information, and reduced our time to resolve
Pros and Cons
  • "The network mapping is an excellent feature, as each device is represented by a different shape or object, which is great for helping us, our staff in training, and our customers understand how the network is structured. Seeing the bigger picture helps immensely, as we provide remote support; we're not boots on the ground."
  • "I want the network map to be faster and more responsive."

What is our primary use case?

We're an MSP, and we support small to medium businesses from end to end, including printers, servers, and networks. We use Auvik to manage our clients' infrastructure. Our customers include companies running factories and hotels.

How has it helped my organization?

The ability to manage access points provided by Auvik is a big one for us; it's much easier to track down cable breaks and the specific switch where the lost connection to the access point is. We serve hotels with over 300 access points, so this functionality is essential.

The solution helped reduce repetitive, low-priority tasks through automation, especially regarding tickets. Ticket logging is now automatic, which helps us immensely. A hotel guest is no longer left without a connection for an hour and then complains to the duty manager, who logs a call with us manually. We can see an issue immediately, and start resolving it, which has saved our business a significant amount of time.    

Auvik positively affected our IT team's visibility into our remote and globally distributed networks because we can see all our different devices from a centralized view. It's much simpler and easier to have all our network components visible from one place. This visibility is 100% critical; our customers pay us and expect us to have visibility over the network.  

Auvik reduced our mean time to resolution and significantly reduced the number of issues we face, so we rarely need to resolve anything.   

The solution also helps our projects team implement new technologies into the environment and manage all the teething issues. 

What is most valuable?

The network mapping is an excellent feature, as each device is represented by a different shape or object, which is great for helping us, our staff in training, and our customers understand how the network is structured. Seeing the bigger picture helps immensely, as we provide remote support; we're not boots on the ground.

The solution provides detailed device information, including serial numbers, lifecycles, and differentiation between devices, which is another excellent feature.

The monitoring and management functions work fine, and we have no issues with them; it integrates well with our remote system. Auvik sends alerts and creates tickets in our ticketing system, which is fantastic for us because we see an alert come in and pop onto Auvik to start our investigation. The ease of use is essential, the easier, the better. We have a lot of customers, and each one wants to feel like they've received five-star treatment. The quicker we can resolve an issue, the better our customers feel, and the easier it becomes for us to get paid.  

Auvik is fantastic for helping to visualize our organization's network mapping/topology; we've used different monitoring solutions, but nothing can give us a network diagram like Auvik. Previously, we made network diagrams manually, a time-consuming, painstaking process. As soon as we had to add or swap out a switch, we would have to edit the diagram. We used Microsoft Project for that and had to pay for the functionality. It was so much effort for minimal reward. With Auvik, we put in little effort and get a lot of rewards. The network visualization is intuitive enough overall.   

It helps keep our device inventories up-to-date; it features a collector that gathers detailed information about the network, which makes management easier. We can see what's online, decommissioned, or coming onto the network when it's not supposed to. This functionality saves us a significant amount of time.   

What needs improvement?

I want the network map to be faster and more responsive. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for almost a year. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The tool is stable enough for now. Once a lot of items are on the network map, it can get sluggish, but other than that, it's pretty stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable, and we have many customers there. As far as I know, we can add as much as we want.

How are customer service and support?

I never had to contact Auvik's technical support. The solution has excellent documentation, so I can always go in there and better my knowledge.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously used multiple solutions, including N-central and PRTG Network Monitor. We switched because Auvik allows us to have more devices, different devices, the ability to differentiate between them, and detailed information that the other products could not provide.

How was the initial setup?

I wasn't involved in the deployment, but in terms of maintenance, the solution requires some upkeep. When devices come and go, we have to remove them manually, but it's still straightforward to see what's going on on a network level rather than having to be there in person.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't know how much the solution costs, but the fact that we've moved almost all of our customers over to it means it must be worth the value. Our platforms are costly, but we switched to Auvik, so the company must see it as cost-effective.

What other advice do I have?

I rate Auvik nine out of ten. 

The solution does not provide a single integrated platform simply because we use many different platforms. Auvik is outstanding because it provides the most information and has the most capable feature set. Still, we have many requirements within our business that Auvik alone cannot cater to.

The cloud is the future when comparing Auvik's cloud-based solution versus on-prem network monitoring solutions. On-prem can be nice, as it can be a little faster, but we have to be in the cloud now. Having one place to go, one platform, is too valuable, and it's much better.  

I advise those evaluating the solution to play around and use it before implementing it. I recommend the platform.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Other
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: MSP
PeerSpot user
it_user1632564 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Aug 16, 2021
Makes it easier to find the devices on the network and pull out the information
Pros and Cons
  • "Auvik has decreased our mean time to resolution. It's easier to find the devices on the network and pull out the information. Of course, the SNMP is also good to get the logs. It helps in the network debugging or if we have to find any problems."
  • "Auvik just works out-of-the-box."
  • "It's missing the license checker feature. We are using Salesforce and the license is a really crucial part of the development, and we have to monitor it. Now, I have to write a script and then run it on a random Linux box and get a notification if it's expiring. It's a really specific feature. I'm not sure Auvik will develop it."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use cases are for monitoring the network and backup for the switches and firewalls.

How has it helped my organization?

The daily backups monitoring and the notifications if something goes down have improved my organization.

Auvik has decreased our mean time to resolution. It's easier to find the devices on the network and pull out the information. Of course, the SNMP is also good to get the logs. It helps in the network debugging or if we have to find any problems. 

What is most valuable?

The backup feature is really good. The monitoring feature is the main reason why we use Auvik.

Auvik is really helpful and straightforward. I like the free training as well. It's easy to use.

It's done a pretty good job when it comes to its network discovery capabilities. It's pretty accurate. Although, we have a few VPNs and maybe a bit more complicated setup. It's complicated to do it the right way, but it's fine. It's not a big issue. 

We tried the traffic insights feature. My director uses it to report issues about traffic things. It shows the network bandwidth usage without the need for expensive inline traffic decryption.

This feature to check the bandwidth is good because we have a high bandwidth development, so it's hard to check. If we saw high bandwidth usage, it is not an issue for us because it's part of the development.

We use automated out-of-the-box device configuration backups. Before Auvik we didn't have any solution and we haven't had any script or task to do this. And it was one of the selling points for us to have the backups and see the differences between the configurations. So it's not to save anything. It was one of the reasons why we subscribed to Auvik.

I would rate Auvik's time to value for setup time, automated network mapping, and documentation a ten out of ten. 

The cost savings we have realized to the solution versus its cost is an eight out of ten because we haven't saved a lot but it improved our system. 

What needs improvement?

It's missing the license checker feature. We are using Salesforce and the license is a really crucial part of the development, and we have to monitor it. Now, I have to write a script and then run it on a random Linux box and get a notification if it's expiring. It's a really specific feature. I'm not sure Auvik will develop it.

We used Nagios for monitoring. Since it's an open-source thing, you can easily extend it with plugins. We had the license-checker in Nagios and I miss it in Auvik. There might be a solution to check this license. I just haven't had time to check it.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Auvik for around a year. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We haven't experienced any stability issues. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is pretty good. We have two studios and two offices and it works perfectly.

We have 50 PCs on one side and 200 PCs on the other side. 

We have one or two users actively using it. 

It requires zero maintenance. Nagios was a continuous polishing and setting up of stuff. Auvik is totally different. Auvik just works out-of-the-box. Nagios needs parenting.

How are customer service and technical support?

We had one ticket and they solved it. That was our experience with technical support. 

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously used Nagios. I liked Nagios, but Auvik has much more features. It's an enterprise product instead of a normal one. We tried Auvik, we liked it, and we bought it.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward. My director implemented it and we have two collectors in our two offices. So it was pretty easy. We only had issues with the authentication.

It took around a week. It took one night for him to install it and we were able to fine tune it the next week. We are still learning it.

What about the implementation team?

We did the deployment ourselves. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The licensing is really good. I felt the price was a bit expensive, but it wasn't my decision.

Auvik only charges for certain devices and not the endpoints. We like the way it's licensed. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We didn't evaluate other solutions. Auvik wasn't my choice. We had Nagios and we didn't replace it but we started slowly using Auvik and phasing out Nagios.  

What other advice do I have?

My advice would be not to forget to set up the external IP because it was also a good feature.

I would rate Auvik a ten out of ten. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
it_user1626567 - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Expert Network at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Jul 27, 2021
Its monitoring lets us know the state of our business. It needs flexibility for the pooling of information.
Pros and Cons
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "Because we can't monitor as we would like, we aren't introducing anything more to the platform at the moment."

What is our primary use case?

It is our primary monitoring tool for devices.

We have virtual machines running the Auvik application. The collectors are also installed on the virtual machines.

How has it helped my organization?

The benefit is that it is our primary monitoring tool. 

To some extent, Auvik helps us put out fires with its backup connectivity, before end users even know that there is a problem. If we can access devices faster, then it helps resolve issues before they are noticed.

What is most valuable?

Monitoring: It lets us know the state of our business and statuses.

Discovering by IP range is okay.

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.

What needs improvement?

Sometimes, it is easy to use. Sometimes, it is painful to add something and get some of the features running. For example, we had a problem adding interfaces to the monitoring. When some features are not yet deployed, sometimes we struggle with configuration problems, adjusting it in the proper way.

There have been some problems with the implementation of the monitoring. Because we can't monitor as we would like, we aren't introducing anything more to the platform at the moment.

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.

We can only see the global picture, not the detailed one. This is something that we don't have in Auvik.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Auvik since I came to the company, which would be less than a year ago. I think it was deployed in our company about two years ago.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable. We are well-informed about planned maintenance from Auvik.

It does not require much maintenance to keep Auvik running.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We need to install many instances in each network, which is kind of a problem. A collector needs to be installed for each network. This causes problems with the scalability, especially if you have a network divided by firewalls.

I am using Auvik mostly when there are alerts or something is wrong.

We are monitoring around 40 devices.

How are customer service and technical support?

Auvik's support is pretty helpful and fast in their response. 

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

This was the first monitoring tool that we used.

I was only using some obsolete systems five to seven years ago. Auvik's setup is much easier than it used to be for those.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward and easy. The portal is pretty simple and self-explanatory. The process of deploying does not take long. Basic functionality takes about 40 minutes to set up. If you want more features, then it will take more time.

Auvik was first configured for the virtual environment. Then, we created instances for it.

What other advice do I have?

Evaluate whether it is suitable for your purposes and network, in terms of scalability and flexibility, versus using other features, like disaster recovery or emergency login.

We haven't discovered a lot of devices with Auvik.

It is based on the identified networks. Though, it is not scanning all interfaces, e.g., if you don't have the appropriate subnet. You need to define the range by, e.g., IP devices, then it will scan that range and update the topology automatically. However, it is not an out-of-the-box automatic discovery.

It is worth having two instances on two different parts of the network to have more reliability on a network level.

I would rate this solution as a seven out of 10.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Senior I.T. Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Jun 10, 2021
With real-time and historical monitoring, we know when devices are offline or if there is high utilization
Pros and Cons
  • "Remote accessibility of the network devices is the most valuable feature. I often have to log into switches and routers to make changes, and I can do so from any computer as long as I have an Internet connection. I don't need to have my laptop or a VPN. Auvik is faster."
  • "Auvik's setup time and automated network mapping and documentation provides time-to-value, and the amount of value that you get then in perpetuity relative to the installation is very high."
  • "If I am an administrator, then I have to maintain, clean, and label that environment. Auvik's utility in that regard is cumbersome. It is hard to find where certain things are configured. Also, it is sometimes hard to figure out why Auvik is doing what it is doing."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case is network monitoring.

How has it helped my organization?

One of the things that I like the most is being able to see what is connected to each switch port. If there are 300 switch ports, I can find out which port any given computer is connected to on the network, assuming it is physical. We then can label certain ports as uplinks, servers, or storage. It is easy to find where a lot of traffic is coming from because we can get to that individual switch level, which is a lot easier to do in Auvik than it is to do native in the equipment.

What is most valuable?

Remote accessibility of the network devices is the most valuable feature. I often have to log into switches and routers to make changes, and I can do so from any computer as long as I have an Internet connection. I don't need to have my laptop or a VPN. Auvik is faster.

Auvik automatically updates our network topology. The topology map is drawn in real-time. Seeing the network versus visualizing is helpful. With real-time and historical monitoring, we know when devices are offline or if there is high utilization, specifically with the SNMP monitoring and SSH monitoring.

Its network discovery capabilities are really strong. With the right access, it can detect additional networks, then scan those networks. 

What needs improvement?

It is easy to use, yet not easy to administer. If I am a technician, then I just need to log in to a switch or see what the network is doing and what it is connected to, which is very easy to do. If I am an administrator, then I have to maintain, clean, and label that environment. Auvik's utility in that regard is cumbersome. It is hard to find where certain things are configured. Also, it is sometimes hard to figure out why Auvik is doing what it is doing.

There is a weakness with the network discovery capabilities, e.g., if it has access to virtual machines, then it is picking up on networks that don't matter. These are private virtual networks on individual computers, but Auvik doesn't know the difference. So, it is constantly coming up with new networks that it thinks it needs to scan. In my environment, I have 250 computers with probably 100 people who are running Hyper-V. Each one of those instances is creating virtual networks that it is getting discovered, then I have to tell it to ignore it. I have never seen the ability to say, "Ignore the networks or submits that look like this."

Sometimes, the UX is difficult to navigate for certain aspects. For example, I like to keep the generic devices out of the topology, so I often will purge those, but I only want to purge the ones that are offline. In the managed devices section, although you can filter by generic device, you can't filter by up or down status. You can only do that in the device section, not the managed device section. So, I have to take a picture of the generic devices that are offline, then navigate to another area where I can actually delete these objects, then select them using a picture. I can filter in one place, but I can't delete. Then, in the other place, I can delete, but I can't filter the same way.

For how long have I used the solution?

At this company, I have used Auvik for a year and a half. Prior to that, I would say that I used it for about three or four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability has been fine. I get notifications for network maintenance and there hasn't really been an issue with that.

It requires no maintenance.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The major limitation is the multi-tenant aspect. For example, if I was to put this in a business that had six corporate offices, which is a pretty big business, I wouldn't want all of that under one tenant. I would want that under separate tenants for each location, but there would need to be an eagle eye view of the six locations from a high level, and you wouldn't get that in multi-tenant.

Auvik for MSPs is great because you can segment/isolate the different clients. However, Auvik gets overwhelming when it is a big business with multiple locations, hundreds of networks, and thousands of ports. I think that would be difficult to manage. If you are talking 5,000 to 100,000 switch ports, then you are talking about a lot of networks with a lot of different viewings and protocols. There really is a limit. There is almost no support for any kind of routing protocol. Where there is the Layer 1 and Layer 3 bars that tell you if it is physically connected or Layer 3 routed, the Layer 3 router should really include things, such as, what is the routing protocol that it found or the ability to see a trace route of how it is routed.

How are customer service and technical support?

Sometimes the technical support is really good, and sometimes it is just terrible. Some of the gentlemen and gals are extremely knowledgeable when it comes to networking. They know the product and are very helpful. Then, some of them don't really get engaged in the support. They will just send an article/link, like, "Read this and do it on your own." I don't reach out to support because I can't find an article or do it on my own. I reach out because there is something I don't understand or don't know how to do. Making sure that they understand what it is that I am trying to accomplish requires a conversation, and some are willing to get on a phone call and some of them are willing to. The ones who are willing to get on a phone call are the ones that I have the best experiences with.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was pretty complex. The company that I work for moved out of an office where we had 60 to 70 switches. Now, we are down to about 12. Therefore, the setup was more complex back then, although we only had one location. Now, we have one location and one data center. The deployment took four to six hours.

Auvik's setup time and automated network mapping and documentation provides time-to-value. It is very valuable in that sense. For a small environment, it rolls out for you very quickly, e.g., five minutes. Roll out the collector and let it do its scan, label one or two networks that are there, throw in the credentials, make sure it is identifying everything, and you are done. Then, it just kind of works. The amount of value that you get then in perpetuity to the relative installation is very high, but as a single IT company or an employee in a single company, that quick rollout isn't as valuable because I am only doing it once.

What about the implementation team?

I did the deployment myself. I have used Auvik before, so I just set the collector using VMware OVA. I put a collector in our office, labeled the networks and set exemptions from the scan, and then just let it go. Obviously, I tried to enter all the credentials that I could at the time, but then I found I had to make modifications to group policy so the computers and servers could be accessed. So I probably just threw it out there and then added the credentials later. If I had to do it again, I would have put the credentials in first then threw it out there.

What was our ROI?

We are not making a profit on Auvik. It is an expense.

Although networking is only a small piece of what I am doing, it can be a time-intensive aspect. So, the time required is significantly less using Auvik than it is to manage the devices individually.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

As an individual IP company, Auvik is a little bit pricey. It is a little expensive, but as an MSP owner, I have a small side business. So, I'm an Auvik customer in that sense too. In that, I think it's reasonable to pay $10 to $15 a device or less depending on the endpoint. For the amount of capability that it has, it is very reasonably priced.

There are devices monitored at no charge, such as:

  • UPS batteries
  • VMware ESX hypervisors
  • Wireless access points
  • Printers
  • Dell EMC iLO cards.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I would probably compare Auvik to PRTG Network Monitor. I think Auvik is a lot faster than PRTG Network Monitor. I am not a very big fan of other solutions. I have never really tried them. 

Auvik gives us inventory. I don't think PRTG Network Monitor does that. So, I can integrate Auvik with our IT Glue cloud status, then we have an inventory of network devices that we don't have to manually create. It saves some time there. PRTG Network Monitor doesn't do that.

PRTG Network Monitor is easier and simpler to set up because it is not trying to do everything that Auvik is trying to do. Once you point it at a device and give it the credentials, it just starts monitoring. At the same time, it doesn't show the relationships between other devices; it doesn't show those connections. It is not an apples to apples comparison. 

We haven't had any SolarWinds Orion products. Now, we wouldn't buy that at all. Auvik is far easier than Orion.

What other advice do I have?

My team members aren't really using it. The other guy is kind of a junior IT guy, and I think it is still intimidating to him. My boss is a higher level engineer, but he is too busy managing to do anything technical. He just relies on me to tell him if there is anything he needs. He mostly wants the solution for the monitoring. He wants to know when a hypervisor module is failing or a hypervisor server goes down.

If you don't put in the credentials, Auvik can't log in and grab those device backups. Once you put those in, then it is automated. It logs in and grabs the configurations. Although, Auvik doesn't support all devices. So if you don't think you have certain types of hardware, it doesn't do anything for you.

Networking has a high learning curve and Auvik lowers that learning curve. It doesn't eradicate or eliminate it though. You still need a pretty strong level of understanding of networking in order to understand the GUI visualization that it is presenting. Just like any other tool, the time invested is largely going to determine the quality of your return.

Auvik has a little ways to go, but I still highly favor it, so I would rate it as an eight out of 10.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
CIO at Pierce Companies
Real User
Jun 9, 2021
Started providing value right away by immediately sending out alerts
Pros and Cons
  • "Auvik is easy to use. The first thing you see when you open it up is a map of the United States or wherever you are, and it shows the locations of all of your network endpoints. For discovery, you set credentials and manage the credentials and it tells you when it needs a new credential. So you just click the "Manage Credentials" button and it takes you to the right spot. You enter in a new credential and then it starts looking closer at the device. It can give you all kinds of information from inside the device's log. We use it for CIS logs and we use it for just regular logging. The CIS log was something I was looking for in the other products, just so we have a place for the CIS logs to congregate so we can look them up."
  • "Auvik started providing value right away."
  • "The map would be the first thing I would like to see improved because sometimes the maps get really odd-looking and the automated placement of things on the map, devices on the map is sometimes not right. In fact, I was just looking at the map and something got moved. I'm sure it didn't get moved, it's just that Auvik realized it was supposed to go somewhere else. So the map could be better if there was a little bit of manual manipulation that you could do."

What is our primary use case?

We use Auvik to monitor two different domains and to review any trouble that might come up. It's opened our eyes to some problems that we've had on the network and now we're working to fix those.

How has it helped my organization?

One of the things we noticed is that our wifi access points were throwing a bunch of errors. So we're in the process to replace those access points.

It is also very good at notifying you if the network goes down, and then it'll tell you if it's cleared or if it's come back up. 

Auvik started providing value right away. The APs immediately started sending alerts. It's really important that the wireless network works properly over at that location. Looking at the alerts, it's got big problems, and it's just because of old devices.

What is most valuable?

The alerts that it sends out are the most valuable aspect of this solution. The maps are okay. The interface is okay, but the alerts are what I really like.

Auvik is easy to use. The first thing you see when you open it up is a map of the United States or wherever you are, and it shows the locations of all of your network endpoints. For discovery, you set credentials and manage the credentials and it tells you when it needs a new credential. So you just click the "Manage Credentials" button and it takes you to the right spot. You enter in a new credential and then it starts looking closer at the device. It can give you all kinds of information from inside the device's log. We use it for CIS logs and we use it for just regular logging. The CIS log was something I was looking for in the other products, just so we have a place for the CIS logs to congregate so we can look them up.

The menu on the left-hand side is very straightforward and clear. If you want to see it, just log on to a certain endpoint, bring up that endpoint, click CIS log on the left-hand side, and you'll see the CIS log.

It's easy to navigate. Everything is intuitive and easily accessible.

The network discovery capability is very good. Last week we refreshed one of our locations, and while an employee was out there refreshing the location or replacing devices, I could sit and watch Auvik find the new device and start mapping it. It automatically updates our network topology.

There's only one other team member and he doesn't use it. So it's just me that uses it. And I use it to make sure that there are no loops in the network or the network is not configured wrong. Every once in a while, the map will do something funny and we'll have to try to figure out what it did. You are better off if you physically document the ports that things are plugged into and then put those into Auvik, which is not hard. You just click on the connection line and go ahead and edit it.

We never would have known that the access points were a problem until Auvik came along. The location that has the bad access points was running slow and we could not figure out why without Auvik. The network was basically configured wrong. Something was plugged in and created the loop. Within hours, we could have somebody go onsite to fix it.

We use the TrafficInsights feature a little. It shows us network bandwidth usage without the need for expensive inline traffic decryption. The part that's important to me is the application breakdown. It breaks down the applications that are running and taking up bandwidth. It lists all the applications that are taking up bandwidth.

What needs improvement?

The map would be the first thing I would like to see improved because sometimes the maps get really odd-looking and the automated placement of things on the map, devices on the map is sometimes not right. In fact, I was just looking at the map and something got moved. I'm sure it didn't get moved, it's just that Auvik realized it was supposed to go somewhere else. So the map could be better if there was a little bit of manual manipulation that you could do.

Everything else is pretty simple and straightforward and easy to use.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Auvik for six months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's always been stable for me and available. They do have scheduled downtime, but that's usually in the middle of the night and it's usually pretty quick.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have a small network. We do have two domains, which a lot of things don't work well with as far as network tools, but Auvik works great. It just picks out both networks and we go from there. 

We're monitoring 575 devices with Auvik. We've maxed out on our network. We might add other devices.

It requires zero maintenance from our side. 

How are customer service and technical support?

I've used support once or twice and they were efficient, quick, and solved the problem. I don't remember what the problem was, but they were quick and efficient about it.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very easy. We use VMware, so we set up the connectors that we needed and Auvik just started working. It started going through the network and building maps at each location. It was very simple. The setup took a few hours to a day.

What was our ROI?

It's too soon to have seen ROI, but I'm sure we will.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The value is there. It's not that expensive per device and it's licensed per device. Unlike some of the other tools that I use, it's not really expensive. It's a good value for the price.

Out of those 575 devices, 49 of them are billable. The non-billable devices are workstations and printers.

What other advice do I have?

Everything just worked. The important thing is to set up your devices properly so that there are passwords and ports that Auvik can use so that it can get in, get the configuration, and also flag any alerts.

I would rate Auvik an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
it_user1567476 - PeerSpot reviewer
Global IT Security Administrator at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Jun 7, 2021
Automatically builds and updates network topology and helps us in standardizing our platforms
Pros and Cons
  • "The visibility that it provides is probably the most valuable feature because we need to know what our sites look like. Understanding what our sites look like and knowing about what kind of network gear or network equipment these sites are running is very important for us. Previously, we didn't have visibility into everything."
  • "We have seen our return on investment in terms of visibility and standardizing of platforms."
  • "They can definitely build more alerts."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for visibility into remote sites. We use it to fix misconfigurations that come up, investigate network issues or network slowdowns, and alert us if devices go down.

In terms of deployment, it is pretty much all cloud-based. There is an agent that you put on a server for your site.

How has it helped my organization?

We have been able to see potential misconfigurations across the network where things like STP are not set up properly. 

It has helped us to deal with issues proactively. When disk space is low on endpoints or servers, we have set up alerts to preemptively reach out to people so that we can take care of it before it becomes a bigger issue. We are able to let users know that we need to upgrade the storage on servers or endpoints.

The automation of network mapping has allowed us more time to focus on things that we deem necessary. It has enabled our junior network specialist to resolve issues directly and freed up senior-level team members to perform higher-value tasks.

I am sure it has decreased our mean time to resolution, but it is something that I need to reconfirm with our local system administrators. 

It automatically updates our network topology. It has also simplified our operations and saved the time of our staff members to a limited degree. Our structure is a little bit different from most companies, so I can't describe the full impact, but it has been helpful for the visibility that it provides into local networks.

What is most valuable?

The visibility that it provides is probably the most valuable feature because we need to know what our sites look like. Understanding what our sites look like and knowing about what kind of network gear or network equipment these sites are running is very important for us. Previously, we didn't have visibility into everything.

Its network discovery capabilities are excellent. It is able to automatically scan subnets as long as they're reachable from the host machine. After you have installed it, you can choose which subnets you want to scan to build your network. It will automatically build a topographic map of the network, which is good to understand the structure of each of these networks. It does this in a fairly quick response time and with ease of use and ease of access. 

Alerting is a great feature. We have been able to set up alerts for devices to preemptively reach out to users and let them know that we need to upgrade the storage on servers or endpoints. 

It is very easy to use and deploy. You can easily configure network monitoring on the sites.

What needs improvement?

They can definitely build more alerts. Firewalls can be more integrated to provide more information, and there can be better integration with Meraki. 

It also needs ports for stack switches. Getting into the Office 365 realm would also be a good thing for them.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Auvik for about eight months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is rock-solid in terms of stability. We have not had any downtime. It hasn't gone down on us. Maintenance windows are scheduled appropriately, and notifications are sent out in advance.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable. It is currently being used in 15 to 20 different networks. Across global sites, we probably monitor more than 1,000 devices.

How are customer service and technical support?

I haven't really had to use their technical support. We've just taken help from our onboarding success manager.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We needed something that was easy to deploy and gave us visibility. We also needed something that we could standardize across the sites.

How was the initial setup?

It is certainly easy enough to deploy. Our strategy was to work with each site for a couple of hours to install the agents and have the credentials in place in Auvik. We repeated this for every company that we had, and it took us about two months to deploy it to more than 20 organizations. 

What about the implementation team?

In its deployment, 10 to 15 system administrators were involved. Auvik has an onboarding specialist, and this specialist was the only person whose help we required. Their specialist was top-notch, professional, and caring, and our experience was great.

It is a cloud-based solution, so we don't have to do any maintenance. 

What was our ROI?

We have seen our return on investment in terms of visibility and standardizing of platforms. Auvik has enabled us to standardize our platforms. We have replaced all of our other local network monitors with a single platform. I don't know if it has really saved us in licensing costs. It is not cheap, but it has allowed us to consolidate all our other platforms.

Taking into account Auvik's setup time, automated network mapping, and documentation,
it has a pretty good time to value.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Its pricing is a little on the high end. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. 

It is more expensive than other solutions, but their per-device model is very fair. Anything other than the networking gear is monitored by Auvik at no charge.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated LogicMonitor. LogicMonitor has a much wider breadth in what it can do and monitor. It is also much more configurable than Auvik, but Auvik is easier to roll out in a quicker timeframe. Auvik also wins with the autodiscovery and mapping features.

What other advice do I have?

It is definitely for larger networks, and the ease of deployment is where Auvik shines. 

It provides automated out-of-the-box device configuration backups, but we do not use this feature. We are also not using as many TrafficInsights features as we would like to use. We are planning to use more, but at this time, we do not utilize many TrafficInsights features.

I would rate Auvik an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Auvik Network Management (ANM) Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: June 2026
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Auvik Network Management (ANM) Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.