We performed a comparison between BigPanda and Icinga based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is user-friendly and has good performance and certification."
"The program is very stable."
"One of the most valuable features of BigPanda is its user-friendly interface."
"The most useful feature has been the AI/ML. The way BigPanda uses the AI/ML is good compared to other SRE tools."
"Alert deduplication and correlation - In an environment like the NOC where you're ingesting hundreds and thousands of alerts from various monitoring sources, it's time consuming and difficult to go through individual alerts and also difficult to spot critical issues. It's been great to have BigPanda not only deduplicate alerts but also correlate alerts that are seemingly unrelated, to create a clearer picture."
"We have also made extensive use of the outbound integrations to ticketing systems (JIRA) and collaboration tools (Slack). The main driver for us has been getting all alerting into a single UI and enabling us to streamline our incident management process."
"BigPanda integrates well with other solutions, such as WatchGuard,"
"Easy integration - We've had challenges in the past integrating all of our various monitoring sources and tools into one central system. BigPanda, with the integrations that it already has, as well as offering webhook/REST API, has made it very easy for us to plug everything in."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."
"I like the ability to amend and adjust things really easily, which is useful in a case where you could make it auto-discover and then set a template to say all of these applications or servers under this template have an automatic threshold set that you’d set up manually."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"BigPanda could improve by syncing its threshold settings with Dynatrace to align with users' familiarity."
"Analytics is an area for improvement, being able to break down the actions that are being taken by users of BigPanda, as well as the auto-magical work that is being done by BigPanda."
"Our infrastructure is quite large - tens of thousands of servers, often with 30-plus checks running on each host with one minute intervals. This generates a lot of data often in bursts (when we have a large scale failure). This has caused some delay in the ingestion pipeline."
"The cost of this product is too high compared to New Relic."
"We had to use a partner for the deployment."
"The solution could improve by having better integration."
"The observability can be enriched with regards to infrastructure and the application-integrated environment. The dashboard and reports could be improved."
"Lacks sufficient dashboard features."
"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"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."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"In general, the product does not look good. However, it does what it is supposed to do. So, the improvements should focus on usability and UI."
"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."
BigPanda is ranked 43rd in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 12 reviews while Icinga is ranked 23rd in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 16 reviews. BigPanda is rated 7.2, while Icinga is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of BigPanda writes "Offers comprehensive alert monitoring and a user-friendly interface but requires manual validation to provide accurate alerts". 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". BigPanda is most compared with ServiceNow, Moogsoft, PagerDuty Operations Cloud, ServiceNow IT Operations Management and IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus, whereas Icinga is most compared with Zabbix, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Nagios XI and Centreon. See our BigPanda vs. Icinga report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.