Apica vs Nagios Log Server comparison

Apica and Nagios are both solutions in the Log Management category. Apica is ranked #18 with an average rating of 7.7, while Nagios is ranked #43 with an average rating of 8.0. Apica holds a 0.3% mindshare in Log Management, compared to Nagios’s 0.8% mindshare. Additionally, 81% of Apica users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Nagios users who would recommend it.

Apica

Read 11 Apica reviews

1,060 Views
435 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

Nagios Log Server

Read 4 Nagios Log Server reviews

1,249 Views
1,249 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Apica

Nagios Log Server

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Apica and Nagios Log Server compete in monitoring and log management. While Apica is superior in deployment ease and support, Nagios Log Server has the upper hand in feature set, favored despite higher perceived costs.

Features: Apica offers real-time monitoring capabilities, reliable performance, and efficient issue resolution. Nagios Log Server is noted for its extensive log management, robust integration options, and comprehensive tool suite.

Room for Improvement: Apica could improve customization options, add more intuitive controls, and enhance user interface flexibility. Nagios Log Server needs better scalability, faster processing speed, and improvements to handle large data volumes.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Apica is recognized for straightforward deployment processes and efficient customer service, appreciated for quick issue resolution. Nagios Log Server requires more setup time but is supported by valuable documentation for those with technical expertise.

Pricing and ROI: Apica’s pricing is considered competitive, offering a quicker return on investment due to lower setup costs and operational efficiency. Nagios Log Server, despite a higher initial setup expense, is justified by its robust feature set, perceived long-term ROI, and comprehensive log analysis capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Apica vs. Nagios Log Server Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Apica vs. Nagios Log Server

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 peers since 2012

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

Apica

Ranking in Log Management

18th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (17th), IT Operations Analytics (5th), Observability Pipeline Software (2nd)

Nagios Log Server

Ranking in Log Management

43rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of Apica is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nagios Log Server is 0.8%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Log Management

Featured Reviews

Punith H K

Senior Systems Engineer at Infosys

Enables users to create scripts easily and provides excellent real-time monitoring features

It is easy to create scripts. We don't have to write any script. Ready-made options are available. We can select, drag, and drop the options, and the script is ready. The solution’s real-time monitoring features have had a huge impact on our service delivery. If we have an application and the script for it, we keep monitoring it. When the script goes red, it indicates that something is not working. So, we check and analyze the applications. We keep track of applications and monitor whether they are live or not. The tool is also useful for monitoring cloud services.

Read full review

Syarul Idzuddin Adzmi

Operation Director at Digital Pulse Sdn Bhd

A scalable and affordable tool for monitoring data centers

Five engineers are needed for the maintenance of the product. I would definitely recommend the solution to those planning to use it. To increase the rating for the product, Nagios should offer remote support and offer more customization in reporting while making it easy for the customers to use it. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is easy to set up and configure."

"It uses a basic scripting language, which is easy to learn and customize as needed. Compared to LoadRunner, I found writing and customizing code much easier in Apica."

"With the ZebraTester, the ability to have and store dynamic variables, when setting up the monitors, means you can extract that value and use it in a subsequent service call. This is something that has made our lives easier... This is one of the features that I like the most because it helps us in configuring these services, in a certain flow, without the need to re-record the whole thing."

"I like the transcript download feature. And with UI scripting, it's helpful that Apica handles a lot of the backend work automatically. I don't have to tag everything manually, though I can tag elements later if needed. It's really good at recording the steps."

"Anyone can understand the solution easily because it doesn't require a specific scripted language."

"It is easy for beginners to learn and use Apica."

"One of the biggest advantages of moving to Apica is the ability get to a hybrid model with the architecture in the cloud and our agents on-prem. We also have access to Apica's cloud agent across the globe. That has changed the way that we have our load testing setup at this point. Previously, it was always internal. Now, with this change in the way it is implemented for load testing, we can test anywhere across the globe and from the list of agents available within Apica's cloud. If I don't have an agent available in a second location, it just takes an email to their customer support, then it is spun up within 24 hours. That flexibility has changed the way that we perceive our load tests, not just in the US, but globally."

"From our standpoint, there are a number of valuable features. The WebHooks are obviously really great. The alert framework is really good and then the reporting and visualizations that you get from the dashboards is good. Those three areas are primarily what my team's focused on in terms of usage from day to day."

More Apica pros

"One of the most valuable features is the dashboard because the UI was effective and easy to use. The alert systems are good as well. We had no failovers and had high availability. We can search the queries fast as well in Nagios Log Server."

"The initial setup of Nagios Log Server was easy and straightforward."

"The product is scalable."

"A great feature of the solution involves its internal portal."

Cons

"The reporting part that we use for our executives needs a bit more customization capabilities. Right now, you can use only the three main templates for reporting. We would like to be able to customize them."

"We could use more detailed information in the request and response sections."

"We have been focused on reducing polling times for synthetic checks. We have gone from 10 minutes down to five minutes for a pretty broad swath, but there is some appetite to reduce that further, which could be an improvement."

"The having to install an application on your desktop to utilize something like ZebraTester is a little cumbersome. It would be nice to see that become a web-based application. Having the documentation a little more accessible, and easier to digest by people who are just learning how to use the framework, especially when it comes to more complex or more edge-based cases would be really helpful to have."

"Alerting needs improvement. It's a little noisy. It needs some better options. Currently, they have an issue, when you set up a synthetic monitor, you can set up where it's monitoring from, a data center that Apica owns."

"If you are adding any input file, the tool fails to capture the path."

"It is difficult to create a script using ZebraTester."

"Apica is costly, and there's no way to test mobile applications through Apica."

More Apica cons

"The configurations during initial setup could be improved. If they could be agentless, as in the case of the Ansible product, it would be better. I would like to be able to analyze the network bandwidth."

"As we are talking about a product which is open to the public, the pricing makes it challenging for us to profit off of its marketing."

"The support could be better."

"The customization and dashboards have shortcomings and need to be improved to make the tool look more presentable."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I am sure that Apica's price will be lower than LoadRunner."

"The product is less expensive compared to LoadRunner."

"License management is another area that Apica could do better. We have already had these conversations with our account teams. This is something that they are looking at largely improving in upcoming releases. I believe that this is already on their roadmap."

"The solution's pricing is not cheap, but it is in the midrange."

"The pricing and licensing are very reasonable. At the end of the day, you are using their technology/software and getting X amount of checks for a very decent value. As for discounts, they try to meet your budgets as much as they can. For example, if you need 100 checks and you have X amount of budget for it, then they will try and get down to that price. Costing-wise, it is a reasonably cost product. They will always try and come down to your price if you need them to come down to it by knocking off certain areas."

"Another main difference between Apica and the other products was the cost. We really thought that the balance in Apica between the features and costs was the best among all the products on which we did a PoC."

"The pricing is fair. It is neither too cheap nor too expensive."

"The level of alerting accuracy has saved us time and money in operational costs. Overall, it has automated a lot of the manual efforts which have been more complex with some of our other scripting tools or monitors. So, it brings things together by doing things faster and saves us money."

More Apica pricing and cost advice

"For a single instance, the price is around $4,000."

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap, I rate the pricing an eight or nine."

"We found the pricing to be quite affordable."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Media Company

11%

Comms Service Provider

Retailer

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

University

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apica Synthetic?

The GUI is powerful and doesn't require scripting or regular expressions. It has a vast finder for correlation, which is easier than other tools like JMeter and LoadRunner. It's also easy to integr...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apica Synthetic?

I know Apica is an expensive solution, but it is worth the money for the service it provides.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Apica Synthetic?

Apica cannot perform endurance or scale-up tests independently. It requires other tools like ALM. When editing scripts, only one can be accessed at a time, risking changes affecting other folders. ...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Dynatrace vs Apica

Compared 27% of the time

Cribl vs Apica

Compared 19% of the time

AlertSite vs Apica

Compared 12% of the time

Datadog vs Apica

Compared 12% of the time

Splunk Enterprise Security vs Apica

Compared 11% of the time

More Apica Competitors

Wazuh vs Nagios Log Server

Compared 54% of the time

Graylog vs Nagios Log Server

Compared 14% of the time

Grafana Loki vs Nagios Log Server

Compared 10% of the time

SolarWinds Kiwi Syslog Server vs Nagios Log Server

Compared 6% of the time

syslog-ng vs Nagios Log Server

Compared 5% of the time

More Nagios Log Server Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Apica

August 2025

Download Apica product report

Buyer's Guide

Nagios Log Server

August 2025

Download Nagios Log Server product report

Also Known As

Apica LoadTest, Apica Synthetic

No data available

Overview

Apica leads in observability cost optimization, empowering IT teams to manage telemetry data economics efficiently. It supports various data types, reducing costs by 40% with flexible deployment options and eliminating tool sprawl through modular solutions.

Apica Ascent optimizes observability costs across metrics, logs, traces, and events and provides adaptability beyond proprietary formats. Its patented InstaStore™ technology ensures maximum storage efficiency and advanced root cause analysis. Organizations leverage Apica for comprehensive control over observability investments, reducing runaway costs. With solutions for mitigating high-cardinality data challenges, Apica supports any data lake preference and offers cloud or on-premises deployments. Its modular solutions eliminate unnecessary tool redundancies, enhancing economic efficiency in telemetry data management.

What features define Apica's capabilities?

Global Presence: Extensive points of presence worldwide
Advanced Alerting: Accurate system notifications
Robust Scripting: Supports multiple protocols easily
Flexible Integration: Effortless system connections
Environment Simulation: Adapts various test scenarios globally

Which benefits should users expect from Apica?

Cost Efficiency: Reduces observability costs by 40%
Data Flexibility: Supports any data source
Modular Approach: Eliminates tool redundancies
Advanced Analysis: Enhanced root cause capabilities
Deployment Variety: Cloud and on-premises options available

Apica addresses industry needs in monitoring and testing applications, enhancing user experience across sectors. It is instrumental in synthetic checks, load testing, API monitoring, and validating functionalities for stability in gaming, finance, eCommerce, and banking platforms. Apica's versatility supports both on-premises and cloud environments, ensuring accurate insights into service availability and network performance.

Apica

Nagios Enterprises delivers official products, services, and solutions for and around Nagios – the industry standard in enterprise-grade IT infrastructure monitoring. With millions of users worldwide, Nagios is the undisputed champion in the IT monitoring space. Our team of dedicated professionals works to ensure total customer satisfaction with all the services we provide. Our extensive network of partners helps extend Nagios services and solutions to new organizations and markets worldwide to meet a variety of business needs. Nagios Enterprises was founded in 2007 by Ethan Galstad. Ethan created what would later become known as Nagios in 1999, and currently serves as the President of Nagios Enterprises.

Nagios

Sample Customers

HBO, JPMC, Morgan Stanley, Xander, EA Sports, Volvo

IBM, impulse, wipro, comteco

Buyer's Guide

Apica vs. Nagios Log Server

July 2025

Free Report: Apica vs. Nagios Log Server

Find out what your peers are saying about Apica vs. Nagios Log Server and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Apica vs. Nagios Log Server report.

See our list of best Log Management vendors.

We monitor all Log Management 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.