We performed a comparison between Kentik and ThousandEyes based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"Having the API access allows us to do a great deal of automation around a lot of our reporting and management tools."
"The most valuable features have been anything around traffic engineering: being able to determine the source or destination of a surge of traffic, whether it's DDoS-related, or a customer just happened to have a sudden uptick in traffic. Being able to tell where that's coming from or where it's going to enables us to do things based on that."
"We're pretty happy with the API functionality. It's web, and it's very simple to set up queries. It has served us well and you don't need to be an expert on the API or the product to set these things up."
"I am able to do a lot of work on the visualization end to create different visualizations and different ways to get information out of it."
"We're also using Kentik to ingest metrics. It's a useful feature, and its response time, whenever we're pulling back the data, is higher than our on-prem solution."
"The drill-down into detailed views of network activity helps to quickly pinpoint locations and causes. All the information is there."
"It offers a simple yet powerful feature of classifying applications, going beyond basic statistics."
"One of the valuable features is the intuitive nature of building out reports, and then triggering actions based on specific metrics from those reports. It has a really good UI and the ability to surface data through the reporting functions is pretty good. That's helped a lot in the security space."
"The company provides excellent service."
"It's fairly easy to set up."
"The authentication overall - including to the VPN and LAN - is excellent."
"ThousandEyes gives companies better visibility."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The solution's initial setup process was straightforward...In terms of ROI, the solution is worth the money."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution was the ability to see how the connection quality is between the sites and get an alert if it was turning bad."
"The most valuable features are integration and ease of use."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"They're moving more in a direction where they are saying, "Hey, here's information that you may be interested in or may a need," before the question has to explicitly be asked. Continuing to move in that direction would be a good thing."
"There is room for improvement around the usability of the API. It's a hugely complex task to call it and you need a lot of backing to be able to do it. I should say, as someone who's not in networking, maybe it's easier for people who are in networking, but for me that one part is not very user-friendly."
"I've checked out the V4 version of the interface and it's still a little bit clunky for me to use. I still go back to the old interface. That's definitely one that they still need to work on. It doesn't seem like everything that you get in the V3, the older interface, is there. For instance, I was trying to add a user or do the administrative tasks in V4, and I couldn't figure out where I was supposed to do that."
"I would like to see them explore the area of cost analysis."
"I consider the pricing model as an area for improvement."
"I believe they're already working on this, but I would love for them to create better integrations from network flow data to application performance — tracing — so that we could overlay that data more readily. With more companies going hybrid, flow logs and flow data, whether it be VPC or on-prem, matched with application performance and trace data, is pretty important."
"The only downside to Kentik, something that I don't like, is that it's great that it shows you where these anomalies lie, but it's not actionable. Kentik is valuable, don't get me wrong, but if it had an actionable piece to it..."
"We asked for a way, regarding the potential networks that exist, to hook Kentik up with external tools like peering DBs to correlate things together and see what we can do... This is all in the [next] beta now."
"There is room for improvement in terms of customization and user-friendliness."
"They only offer synthetic requests."
"I would like the product to offer more agility."
"It's an expensive solution."
"Presently, it lacks the ability to integrate with other Cisco products."
"The tool does not provide features for application-level monitoring."
"The guest portal is hard to use."
"It would be nice if the solution covered other areas like server monitoring."
Kentik is ranked 47th in Network Monitoring Software with 12 reviews while ThousandEyes is ranked 12th in Network Monitoring Software with 11 reviews. Kentik is rated 9.2, while ThousandEyes is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Kentik writes " Flexibility for creating reports and gaining more visibility is a definite strength". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThousandEyes writes "Reliable. simple to set up, and offers fast monitoring capabilities". Kentik is most compared with Arbor DDoS, SolarWinds NPM, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, Datadog and Zabbix, whereas ThousandEyes is most compared with Cisco Secure Network Analytics, Accedian Skylight, Dynatrace, SolarWinds NPM and LogicMonitor. See our Kentik vs. ThousandEyes report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.