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

Cisco DNA Center vs NetBox.dev comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Automation
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (1st), Network Monitoring Software (17th)
NetBox.dev
Ranking in Network Automation
8th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
IP Address Management (IPAM) Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Network Automation category, the mindshare of Cisco DNA Center is 8.5%, down from 14.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetBox.dev is 4.0%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Automation Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco DNA Center8.5%
NetBox.dev4.0%
Other87.5%
Network Automation
 

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.
TM
Consulting Engineer at Racing Victoria Limited
Works as an IP asset management platform but improvement is needed in report automation
I recommend the tool to others. I would suggest ensuring that whoever is working on the deployment is fully dedicated during that time. It's important not to be distracted. In my experience, when someone's focus is split, we encounter a few issues. I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The monitoring features are very useful for network engineers."
"One of the advantages is Cisco support."
"DNA Center is scalable."
"People like to use the dashboards to get an overview of their network."
"It enables monitoring of various components such as access points, switch cards, and other elements within the company's solutions."
"I like that we can easily configure any new hardware. It's also easy to deploy and easy to troubleshoot."
"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."
"I like the visibility, instant build, network, policies, and the ability to control access. I also like that you can visualize your whole network."
"I find NetBox. dev's interaction and user-friendly GUI most valuable. It makes editing and removing items easy for users. Moving away from spreadsheets has been a benefit for our clients. It saves them a lot of time and makes everything accessible."
 

Cons

"There should be an option for automation of template deployment by using the stored data. It is not easy to save configuration information for lots of devices without using other tools. There should be a tighter, better repository of information that can be merged with the templates."
"The solution's setup process needs enhancement."
"Requires more focus on the digital side of things."
"As a user, it would be good if I could plug in controllers, suites, and devices from other vendors to Cisco DNA Center."
"Better compatibility with third parties and to other Cisco products because if versions are not perfectly matching requirements, it gives a lot of problems."
"Integration with analytic tools and API integrations would be ideal."
"They should include UTM features in the product."
"An area for improvement in Cisco DNA Center is the latency in data correlation. For example, sometimes, when an issue happens, and I check the logs, I can't find the corresponding log. There's a delay in log replication, so this is what needs improvement in Cisco DNA Center. Reporting in Cisco DNA Center could also be improved because it only has a few templates, and you can't customize it based on your requirements. There aren't many options available in Cisco DNA Center regarding reporting, versus Cisco Prime, which has excellent features for different levels of detailed reports. I'd like to see real-time data replication in the next release of Cisco DNA Center, similar to what's done in Meraki. Data in Meraki is real-time with no delay, so data is immediately replicated in the cloud. Currently, there's a lag in Cisco DNA Center, and addressing that lag is the enhancement I'd like to see in Cisco DNA Center. The solution also needs to be more user-friendly."
"The tool should improve report automation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We get a yearly license at the time we buy the product."
"Cisco DNA Center is too expensive."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The price could be better. It's a very expensive tool."
"The tool's licensing may not come across as something that may be friendly for users."
"We have a three-year license with them."
"I do know that Cisco does offer some really good promotions for DNA Center to bring the costs down."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Automation solutions are best for your needs.
892,868 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise24
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?
The deployment of Cisco DNA Center was complex due to the fact that on the data center side, we have a Juniper infrastructure, which created some complexity, though not significant. The deployment ...
What needs improvement with NetBox.dev?
The tool should improve report automation.
What is your primary use case for NetBox.dev?
We use the tool as an IP asset management platform, focusing on managing IP addresses. It also helps to manage assets.
What advice do you have for others considering NetBox.dev?
I recommend the tool to others. I would suggest ensuring that whoever is working on the deployment is fully dedicated during that time. It's important not to be distracted. In my experience, when s...
 

Also Known As

DNA Center
No data available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Cisco, Broadcom and others in Network Automation. Updated: May 2026.
892,868 professionals have used our research since 2012.