No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management vs Icinga comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
43rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.3
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (42nd)
Icinga
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
31st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (40th), Server Monitoring (16th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (47th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Cloud Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 2.0%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Icinga2.0%
BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management0.6%
Other97.4%
Cloud Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

VB
Enterprise Solution Architect at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Helps design blueprints in a cloud environment but the support is a major problem
One of the major problems is that support is not so good. I used to have a support expert in Spain but they left two years ago. BMC doesn't invest a lot in network automation but network automation is a major point in CLM. There aren't any experts here in Europe, maybe they have in America, I don't know. The main problem is the support in Europe. We had a lot of problems with the people who got put on our cases. The agents that we were assigned to were not so capable. They wanted to replicate the problem. If you have an incident, it takes a lot of time to troubleshoot the problem. The incident support is not so good. The technicians don't know the platform well. BMC doesn't want to invest in CLM. Two years ago we had a lot of problems. Maybe BMC realized that CLM is an end of life product.
reviewer2292201 - PeerSpot reviewer
Innovation Service Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Easy to use, and it's possible to customize the product as per the needs we may have but average multi-tenancy aspect
It's supported by the community. We use Icinga, which is not part of the Open-Source platform but is wrapped into a commercial solution from another provider, a local provider in Italy. Icinga is an open-source platform, so it is supported by the community. It's quite easy to use, and it's possible to customize the product as per the needs we may have. So it's not expensive, and it's quite a general purpose. We can easily monitor any kind of infrastructure we encounter. The ability to customize scripts and build your own queries to request information from the infrastructure elements you want to monitor. This level of personalization and customization is highly appreciated. The alerting is the same as any other monitoring platform. It's not a "wow" feature that has changed our lives, but it's perfectly adequate.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Total build time has been reduced from four weeks to one week, then later to 24 hours."
"Assesses change impact or completes an audit using multiple dashboard views."
"It's helped us with our automation."
"Supports unattended installs and image-based, script-based, or template-based provisioning."
"Allowing systems to be provisioned in a wide range of environments, such as Azure, AWS, or on-premise, reduces the level of training required as well as creates consistency across the board."
"CLM has a multi-cloud portal because they have the resources to implement in various environments in various ports."
"By allowing end users to request their own services, the request process for systems is much quicker and more accurate."
"We have many regions where more than 10000 servers are deployed, so it helps in patching and hardening of servers."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"Icinga2 was designed to delegate, distribute and balance tasks between several nodes."
"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."
"The ability to customize scripts and build your own queries to request information from the infrastructure elements you want to monitor. This level of personalization and customization is highly appreciated."
"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."
"Icinga has multiple automation and integration features. There is an API for everything and a web UI for configurations. The APIs enable you to automate tasks in Icinga. We can also use plugins to talk to the API. The Icinga Director talks to a database in the background, and you can import settings from the CMDB to all systems in Icinga."
 

Cons

"Going to BMC for PS is not at all recommended from my experience."
"One of the major problems is that support is not so good."
"Needs integrations with other providers to provide a custom public cloud environment."
"The installation and configuration can be tricky due to it being built on Remedy."
"It was complex as it does not include a good, extensive feasibility and compatibility guide."
"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."
"Sometimes, it is very hard to keep an overview of what's happening."
"Network Discovery capabilities would be extremely helpful."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"The user interface should be improved."
"The connection between Icinga and Icinga Web."
"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It's an open-source solution."
"The solution is free to use."
"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."
"The solution is cheap."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Educational Organization
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
University
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
 

Also Known As

BMC CLM
Icinga Cloud Monitoring
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JDA Software, Morningstar, Orange Business Services, Wipro
Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC Cloud Lifecycle Management vs. Icinga and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.