We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) and Icinga 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."
"I don't worry about the scalability of the solution because it is quite a broad, scalable, modern platform."
"Monitoring is probably the most active thing Auvik does for us. If a particular device on the network goes down, we have that granularity to see which network element is causing the problem."
"The ability to put in individualized SNMP checks that might not be in the automated playbook is a valuable feature."
"The ability to have visibility on a network to see the traffic and the ability to see if devices are misconfigured and if something changes in that configuration, are most valuable."
"I like the fact that it's easy to set up and learn our network. I've used some other systems where it takes a lot of time and effort to manage the monitoring system, so you get what you put into it. The nice thing about Auvik is that you put the credentials in, put the agent on the network, and it just does its thing. It sets up alerts that you would most likely turn on anyway without even having to do it. If you add another new device to the network, it detects it and sets alerts up for that device. With the other systems that I've used, I had to manually add those devices in and manually set the alerts for new devices. I like that it's an almost set-it-and-forget-it sort of system."
"It also integrates with our ticketing system. We use ConnectWise and having that integration is valuable for billing and for all-around general management. Having one product that can integrate with everything is valuable because we don't have to worry about building out APIs or custom maps to do that for us."
"Topography mapping is incredibly useful, especially when it's functioning properly."
"I love that Auvik can automatically back up the configuration of switches and firewalls."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"There's a module called Icinga Director, which helps us configure the product using an intuitive interface through clicks instead of creating a text configuration. It's very helpful for us."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"The best thing about the solution is how it highlights errors, the issues, and what needs my attention. The solution directs me to areas that I should look for first."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"For the most part, it's great for visualizing the network mapping/topology for our organization. However, when complex VLAN networks are involved, sometimes, the picture can get a little cloudy. It would definitely be nice if there was some way of choosing a VLAN to view or something like that. They should definitely improve the handling of multiple networks and VLANs."
"I've been finding some features difficult. It might be because I'm used to PRTG, and Auvik works differently. When it comes to monitoring a simple IP address, Auvik makes it a bit harder and more complex because you have to create a service inside the site. It's not just creating a sensor and having it ping the device. You need to go to the site and create the service."
"If the out-of-the-box price was about 30% lower, I think it would have allowed us to purchase it sooner. It definitely costs more than some of the competitors that are out there. It's also better, so I understand why it's a little bit more expensive."
"It needs flexibility for the pooling of information. Because it is fully automated, it is pooling everything from the device from a given category. There is no way to exclude things that are not important or if you want to temporarily remove them to see statistics of other things. For example, we get about 100 MB from Auvik. We are unable to limit this. We would rather stop monitoring something, since some features will always give you alerts, because they shouldn't be monitored. However, it is impossible to exclude them, e.g., the internal interface. If somebody disconnects the device from the internal interface, we get an alert. So, this is something that is really painful for us. More flexibility would solve most of our issues."
"I would like to see more extensive syslog capabilities. It can ingest syslogs and I think it can alert based on quantities of messages. You can also look back at some of the messages, but it's not a forensics level syslog."
"Integrating some LLM/AI capabilities into the product that would enable us to use natural language to query the tool and get sensible answers back would be great."
"When it comes to the management side, the navigation is a little bit difficult, going back and forth. It is a little bit cumbersome... If I go to one device and I look at an interface, I can't just go back to the device and that makes it a pain to navigate."
"We have some clients that are rather large and the topology display can be a little bit of a mess. For smaller organizations, Auvik is perfect... But for some of our larger clients, the topology view is almost unusable."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"It needs Trap SNMP. I saw the documentation for Zabbix, that it has its own built-in product which handles SNMP traps, and there's nothing similar in Icinga or Nagios. I think this feature is most important for me."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"Icinga is a complex solution that's hard to learn. It's a powerful product for monitoring, but new users will have a hard time figuring out what to do."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Monitoring Software with 133 reviews while Icinga is ranked 22nd in Network Monitoring Software with 16 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while Icinga is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Auvik Network Management (ANM) writes "Enables us to get on top of issues before they become an outage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Icinga writes "A stable, scalable and cost-effective solution that helps with inbuilt scripts for easy modification". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Meraki Dashboard and Zabbix, whereas Icinga is most compared with Zabbix, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Nagios XI and Centreon. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Icinga report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Cloud 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.
