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

Kaseya VSA vs N-able N-central comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 2025

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

Kaseya VSA
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
2nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.5
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Patch Management (9th)
N-able N-central
Ranking in Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) category, the mindshare of Kaseya VSA is 18.2%, up from 8.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of N-able N-central is 8.9%, down from 12.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Kaseya VSA18.2%
N-able N-central8.9%
Other72.9%
Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM)
 

Featured Reviews

Stéphane Guerin - PeerSpot reviewer
Software management excels with comprehensive modules
We are a reseller. I am conducting some research since we are a vendor for the Kaseya solution.  Regarding the patching and software management, for me, it's the best path. We have all the necessary modules for monitoring on the server and workstations. All modules are working well, and for me,…
Dimitri V G - PeerSpot reviewer
Maximizing operational efficiency with comprehensive monitoring and automation capabilities
There are areas in N-able N-central that could be improved. We always started it from the basic purpose of monitoring hardware, where vendors such as HP and Dell try to sell their own services which monitor and provide a dashboard, which is their logic. They want to make their own recurring revenue on that. We notice that SNMP has had a good run and still sometimes is used, but it's becoming an issue to maintain the same capabilities because HP makes it unreliable or even removes certain features that we used to be able to validate redundant array of independent disks. Our service that has been running for 15-20 years suddenly is not working anymore because HP decided in generation 10 plus and above, or generation 10 hardware in servers, storage controllers particularly, they just didn't put the SNMP OIDs anymore. We are now following that market change or business change in hardware monitoring and the future is Redfish, REST API, IPMI type of monitoring with the REST API and Redfish being most common. We have to do the effort ourselves because Enable is not really strategically going there because I assume there's not much money to make to improve that or to convince customers to start with their product. That issue could be better if they would be more prepared for that change and give us customers more tools, preconfigured, pre-available custom services for Redfish, REST API, where we just have to put a few items username, password and address and some dots and commas, but that we don't have to reinvent the wheel, which we are doing at the moment. We are using HP iLO commandlets and REST APIs for Aruba. Dell is making it very hard to monitor their hardware. If it has an iDRAC, I can manage it and monitor it, but if it's something that's less common or due to the portfolio, they have done a good job at not exposing information about health. We would just want to have a red or a green dot that indicates if this device is healthy or not healthy. Since nobody's investing in SNMP because it's a liability in security, they should invest in making a REST API and preferably also do the work on making it easy to pull or push information. That's something that the industry in general and Enable in particular could do a significant job to help us monitor.

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 features of the solution are its ability to offer control remotely to its users and provide patching capabilities to users."
"The solution was scalable."
"Being able to connect to client computers without them necessarily needing to be there and being able to put in the patches and manage different information systems is valuable."
"Kesaya is highly configurable."
"Kaseya VSA's best features are auditing and reporting."
"The remote management is quite good. Also, the patch management and service desk are great features of the solution."
"The patching is very efficient and we can rely on the alerts that we receive."
"The most valuable piece of the puzzle for me is what they call Live Connect. It is the piece that allows you to support an end-user without having to take the keyboard and mouse."
"N-able N-central has numerous good features. The asset tracking capability is powerful, allowing you to track hardware and software on devices connected to your network. The remote control is smooth, securely enabling remote access to servers and routers. It can be integrated with ticketing systems and other tools like CrowdStrike and N-able EDR for comprehensive network monitoring and security. The automation feature is handy, allowing you to schedule tasks, respond to system triggers, and automate problem resolution, such as handling disk space issues automatically."
"It's a very robust product. They're continuing to invest and put new enhancements into the product. They're very open about what their roadmap is, which is very good for us because then as a business, we can plan."
"N-able N-central is an easy tool to implement with customers."
"The solution's service is good."
"I like the remote connectivity, reporting suite, and patch management module."
"The most valuable feature of N-able N-central is the many options it has."
"The support is at a good level. So normally, we can always get to a solution when we are stuck with some monitoring problems that we encounter."
"The most valuable features of N-central are its ease of deployment and ease of use."
 

Cons

"The product's user interface is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"There should be more Mac support. Whenever a new Mac operating system comes out, the support is very limited. It takes them a while to get things up to date. We're seeing more and more people move to Mac from the Windows environment for various reasons, but their support for Mac is very limited. A lot of it might have to do with Mac itself, but there are ways to improve upon that. That would be my biggest thing for improvement."
"Some configurations and abilities from the system are not of use. The solution should offer webinars or some sort of training offerings to help users learn what the system can do and how it can be done."
"The way it is laid out can be improved. If it could be a little more intuitive, it might be a little bit easier. Sometimes, it is hard to find features because they're called something weird, or they're in an interesting location that you wouldn't have thought that they'd be in."
"I believe we should include a VSA license to provide complete endpoint management."
"Our main concern is related to security. Kaseya had a ransomware attack a few months ago, and it was a big concern for us because Kaseya was the main RMM tool that we were using. We faced a lot of difficulties accessing our users and systems. So, security is our main concern."
"The solution is hard to use at first until you understand how it works."
"Sometimes, the product misinterprets the functionality of a machine."
"There is room for improvement in the development of custom monitoring services."
"The solution's overall integration should be improved."
"At this moment, we encounter stability issues with N-able N-central from time to time."
"We have to do the effort ourselves because Enable is not really strategically going there because I assume there's not much money to make to improve that or to convince customers to start with their product."
"The integration with other applications could be better."
"Involving AI in the platform could improve it further."
"N-able N-central could improve the remote access, my technicians have complained about it. They have used other free tools instead to compensate, such as TeamViewer. Additionally, when using remote access on the web, it is lacking reports."
"It was previously expensive and tedious to manage different licenses."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not expensive. Anyone can afford it. Most of the time, we get a discount for licenses. We had about 5,000 agents, and we received a discount on the price. There is only the licensing cost. If you use the on-prem version, you also have the infrastructure cost."
"With the on-prem, you buy the agent license. That's a one-time fee, and it varies depending on how many you have. You also pay annual maintenance on the number that you have. So, there are two fees involved: a one-time fee and a recurring fee."
"We pay a monthly fee, but it's a three-year contract divided by 36. They don't offer a true SaaS plan where you can add licenses monthly as you go. The cost is $7 per person per month, and we are paying about $1,700 a month."
"It depends on what products you want. Kaseya loves packages, and if you are packaging, it is more affordable. If you're not packaging, it tends to be a little bit more expensive than others."
"Customers purchase the solutions because it is priced well. There are additional services that have an additional cost."
"The solution's pricing is reasonable."
"Licensing is available on a yearly basis and is priced per node."
"We were looking at a price of $22.50 cents per user."
"The pricing and licensing are average, almost six out of ten."
"N-able N-central is not an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) solutions are best for your needs.
871,408 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Educational Organization
8%
Real Estate/Law Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Performing Arts
6%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business25
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Kaseya VSA?
The most valuable feature of Kaseya VSA is the ability to control laptops remotely.
What needs improvement with Kaseya VSA?
I would improve their support system. They can improve their interface, as the GUI looks very outdated. Although they have many features, improvements in the GUI in terms of the front face and the ...
What is your primary use case for Kaseya VSA?
Primarily, we are using it for remote monitoring and management as an MSP. We are basically a reseller; we are a service provider, so Kaseya VSA is one of our tools which we use for our managed ser...
What needs improvement with N-able N-central?
The MSP part of N-able N-central has evolved over the years. They have been trying to move from professional or network server and desktop licensing to make it more comprehensive. With professional...
What is your primary use case for N-able N-central?
We have been dealing with Enable EDR and N-able N-central, which is a management center. It's the NOC solution that we are currently running our asset management on. We are managing tasks in that e...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SolarWinds N-central, SolarWinds MSP N-central
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage UK, MSP, CodeBlue Ltd, Connect Work Place Solutions, All Covered, 501cTech, Chairo Christian School, Green Duck
Premier Technology Solutions
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaseya VSA vs. N-able N-central and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
871,408 professionals have used our research since 2012.