Scanopy is for IT teams and MSPs who want a dedicated network diagram automation tool which works alongside their existing monitoring platform. PRTG Network Monitor is for teams already invested in the Paessler ecosystem who want built-in topology mapping alongside monitoring. Discovery, the four topology views, pricing, and licensing are where the two differ, including PRTG Network Monitor's trade-offs.
Scanopy vs PRTG Network Monitor: head to head
| Scanopy | PRTG Network Monitor | |
|---|---|---|
| DiscoveryProtocols used to find devices and map connections | SNMP LLDP CDP ARP TCP/UDP | SNMP WMI ICMP [13] |
| ServicesNo No service awareness Basic Common port detection Yes Application-level fingerprinting | Yes240+ types | No |
| Network ViewsWhich topology views the tool produces from discovery. L2 Physical switch ports and links L3 Subnets, VLANs, routing Workload VM/container host nesting Application Service-dependency / app grouping Yes supported Tag ? unverified Greyed not supported | No native auto L2/L3; automatic L2 maps require the third-party UVexplorer add-on. [32] | |
| Live UpdatesWhether diagrams update automatically after the initial scan | Yes | Yes |
| Open SourceOSI OSI-approved open source license Source available Source code available, restricted license No Proprietary | OSI AGPL-3.0 | No |
| PricingStarting price or pricing model | Starts at $11.99 monthly, unlimited hosts | Free up to 100 sensors then tiered [4] |
| Also IncludesCapabilities beyond network diagramming | Docker Visualization | Monitoring Traffic Analysis |
How they compare
PRTG and Scanopy both discover a network and draw maps, but they're built for different jobs. PRTG is a mature, sensor-based monitoring platform released in 2003 with a large installed base; its maps exist to visualize what it monitors. It has no native automatic Layer 2/3 topology mapping. Paessler's knowledge base documents that "PRTG has no way of knowing which switch is connected to which so creating an automatic graph is not possible", and the documented fix is the third-party UVexplorer add-on. Scanopy's entire job is automatic topology: one daemon produces four switchable views (L2, L3, workloads, applications) plus per-host service fingerprinting, with no add-on.
So the trade-off is monitoring-first with bolt-on mapping versus mapping-first as the product. If you already run PRTG and mainly want monitoring, alerting, and traffic analysis, with maps as a secondary view, staying in PRTG (and adding UVexplorer if you need automatic L2 maps) avoids another tool. If accurate, automatic, shareable, multi-view documentation is the goal, Scanopy is built for that and doesn't need a separate discovery engine to produce a topology. Scanopy is flat monthly with unlimited hosts, self-hostable under a commercial license, or free under AGPL-3.0, and it runs alongside PRTG rather than replacing your monitoring.
PRTG's sensor library and monitoring feature set exceed Scanopy's, and Scanopy does no monitoring at all. This comparison is only about which tool draws the network map automatically.
When to choose which
Choose Scanopy when: Choose Scanopy for auto topology over sensor-based monitoring: automatic L2, L3, workload, and application views, per-host service detection, flat pricing regardless of host count, and a free, self-hostable Community edition. It sits alongside your monitoring stack rather than replacing it.
Choose PRTG Network Monitor when: If you already use PRTG for monitoring and want basic topology visibility, the built-in maps avoid adding another tool. The maps show what PRTG discovers, which is thorough.
This is a focused, two-tool comparison.Weighing other options too? See the best PRTG Network Monitor alternatives. For all 13 tools side by side, see the full network documentation tools comparison.
Sources
Started as a homelabber, now deep in SNMP MIBs, Layer 3 topology, and service fingerprinting - building the network documentation tool I wished existed.