We performed a comparison between Pico Corvil Analytics and Zabbix 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."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"We can use CLI with the UI for configuring the new monitoring system, which is good."
"It has all the decoders so it's capturing every network packet and it's decoding in real-time and it's giving us latency information in real-time... It's the real-time decoding and getting the latency information statistics that we find the most useful."
"Time-series graphs are very good for performance analysis. We can do comparisons... We can say this is the latency in the last 24 hours, and this was the same 24-hour period a week ago and overlay the two time-series graphs on top of each other, so we can see the difference. That's a really powerful tool for us."
"We're able to quickly drill down and find answers to events that are happening in real-time, using Corvil's analytics tools. That's the feature which is most in the spotlight..."
"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."
"What is most valuable is the ability to troubleshoot when a client complains of spikes in latencies. It gives us the ability to go granular, all the way down to looking at the network packets and analyze them."
"We like the dashboards because they essentially organize all the sessions into one viewpoint."
"The analytics features of Corvil are really good... As long as you know what the field is in the message, you can build your metrics based on that field... It means you can do the analytics that you actually care for. You can customize it..."
"Zabbix is both stable and scalable."
"The initial setup was not complex."
"The most valuable feature is the alert and alarm monitoring."
"Zabbix is quite stable once it is set up. We haven't had any post-setup issues."
"The solution allows for good integration with other products."
"Simple network monitoring that is easy to install and manage."
"We detect problems before the customer does and before it actually happens using the predictive functions in Zabbix."
"The calculations part is the most valuable."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Before I got the Corvil training... one thing that was not very efficient was that every time you had to create a new stream or a new session from within Corvil... you had to tell it what protocol the message is going to come through and how to correlate messages, etc... After I went for the training, they had already added these nice features in the 9.4 version where it could do auto-discovery... Based on the traffic that it has already seen, it could create sessions on the fly."
"Alerting isn't great... you can only put in one email address in. And that's for all kinds of alerting on the box."
"There is definitely room for improvement in the reporting. We've tried to use the reporting in Corvil but, to me, it feels like a bolt-on, like not a lot of thought has gone into it. The whole interface where you build reports and schedule them is very clunky."
"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."
"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."
"For FIX protocol, maybe we could have built-in configurations for signatures and decoders. Also, for certain protocols, which are newer, we would like to just add the signatures within the decoders itself."
"Zabbix can use better documentation and support for troubleshooting."
"The performance reporting could be improved."
"They should open an SSH session from the web interface."
"There is a bit of a learning curve during installation."
"I think the reporting part of Zabbix can be improved in terms of more user-friendly graphics to display the collected data. Many simple users who don't know how to use Zabbix properly might get confused by the reporting, although at the same time it is very versatile for my company."
"Zabbix isn't a great tool for cloud-specific monitoring - its connection to public clouds needs to be improved. Other areas for improvement would be the lack of dashboards and integrations."
"The product delivers false positives during reporting because of flapping. Other reasonably priced alternatives may have better performance."
"The solution needs to add remote features."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Pico Corvil Analytics is ranked 51st in Network Monitoring Software with 9 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 1st in Network Monitoring Software with 101 reviews. Pico Corvil Analytics is rated 9.0, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Pico Corvil Analytics writes "Helpful support agents, beneficial issue detection, and high availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". Pico Corvil Analytics is most compared with NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, ITRS Geneos, Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline and ThousandEyes, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Amazon CloudWatch and SolarWinds NPM. See our Pico Corvil Analytics vs. Zabbix 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.