Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Checkmk vs DX Unified Infrastructure Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 6, 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

Checkmk
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
11th
Ranking in Server Monitoring
5th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
13th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
DX Unified Infrastructure M...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
75th
Ranking in Server Monitoring
24th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
55th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
41st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
120
Ranking in other categories
AIOps (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Checkmk is 4.1%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of DX Unified Infrastructure Management is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

Paolo Sala - PeerSpot reviewer
A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring
The main room for improvement is in the solution's presentation and the integration area. In our company, we use the integration capabilities from ServiceNow. We also have another big monitoring solution in place in our company, which is Dynatrace. At the moment, there doesn't exist an out-of-the-box integration for Dynatrace. I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most. The only implementation of Checkmk that allows high availability is the virtual appliance that has the option for the availability of a different box. Otherwise, you have to find a way to implement it manually with some custom solution, which could be an improvement.
Arunpandiyan M - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to set up, simple to use, and offers great technical support
There are quite a few manual processes. We've had issues with pulling reports. Sometimes we have trouble or get errors. The reporting process should be easier. If you have a hub, you should be able to have an unlimited number of servers. For example, if you have 500 servers, and the limit is ten, you have to pull 50 reports. We'd like to just pull one report for all servers. This also increases the time to pull reports. If we have to pull more reports, it takes that much longer than just pulling one. The product can be expensive. Right now, they are updating and consolidating the dashboard. I'm expecting an update that will resolve a few glitches in the server.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"Overall, from one to ten, I rate Checkmk a nine."
"Checkmk helps me compare data and foresee issues."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it has a lot of different pieces, and they all work together...It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"Checkmk was built on a platform that was user-friendly, and I could build my charts easily."
"Monitors the infrastructure asset and also monitors as an IT service."
"We are able to go in and actually leverage the thick client for a nice easy drag and drop solution."
"It is easy to implement but requires good planning."
"You can scale it pretty much however way you want to as long as you have the servers to throw at it."
"It is reliable when it comes to monitoring."
"It is very scalable."
"The number of probes available. Out of the box, I believe about 200 probes are available. And, if there's a probe that is not available, you can write one. You can also go to the communities and suggest, and based on demand, CA will write one for you."
"You can integrate clouds, hybrid infrastructure, and on-premise infrastructure into one product."
 

Cons

"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"Sometimes we receive alerts, and it can become annoying when you acknowledge an alert. It is very clunky when you acknowledge the alert. The process is not very intuitive, and there are instances where it feels a bit cumbersome to acknowledge an alert."
"The main challenge for us is that we're moving from Nagios to Checkmk, and we're still getting used to the new way of working."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"Checkmk does not work too easily with the PowerStore. I use a PowerShell script as Checkmk runs on Linux and a Windows system, connecting with the Checkmk agent."
"If an alert is generated for a specific pattern in the log, and if Checkmk catches that log, it will stay there even after the alert is resolved."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"​We want to see more investment in the UI and the dashboard."
"There is also room for improvement in the reporting. It is not really good enough, according to our customers. So what we now usually do is use Power BI to get them the kinds of reports they want."
"There should be wider coverage of storage infrastructure."
"I'd also like to see more probes. More probes in the sense that we were coming across devices that we're expected to monitor and manage for which, out of the box, there isn't a nice, clean solution. There are probes that are dedicated for certain devices and certain device types, which is great. But then there are times we come across nuanced products that we have to develop our own solution for. There are probes that exist in there that allow us to make a customized solution, but it takes a lot more time."
"The dashboards need to be improved."
"I think it can be improved by a greater provision of specialized technical support, as there are very few trained personnel there."
"Stability."
"Reporting capability can be improved especially when it comes to availability."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Checkmk is cheaper compared to other enterprise products."
"The product is affordable."
"Checkmk is a fairly reasonably priced solution."
"The product-price ratio is better than other brands such as Fortinet or SonicWall."
"Pricing for DX Unified Infrastructure Management isn't cheap at all. It's a complex tool, so you have to pay more. No one is happy with a large bill to pay, but if it's a complex product and you designed a complex solution to be monitored, it'll be your fault that you need to buy an expensive product, and that would be implicit in the design of DX Unified Infrastructure Management. Monitoring is just a small part of it. Sometimes you have to pay a significant amount of money for a complex yet very good solution."
"CAD $400,000 annually."
"The license cost depends on the number of probes and robots."
"This product is expensive compared to other vendors (SolarWinds, ManageEngine)."
"Reasonable setup cost and licensing prices."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Checkmk?
The most valuable feature of the solution is that it has a lot of different pieces, and they all work together...It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
What needs improvement with Checkmk?
I will get more information about Checkmk when the proof of concept is done. It's going to be before the summer. There will be a report about the tool and a recommendation to use it. So far, it loo...
What is your primary use case for Checkmk?
Checkmk ( /products/checkmk-reviews ) is a monitoring tool, so that's what I will use it for. Right now, it's not in production, but it's in a proof of concept phase. It looks good, so probably, du...
What is your primary use case for DX Infrastructure Manager?
We are an integrating company that offers DX Unified Infrastructure Management to customers. We help them set it up, do the integration, and provide support. Our end customers include financial ins...
What advice do you have for others considering DX Infrastructure Manager?
I would recommend DX Unified Infrastructure Management to others as it is a good and reliable solution. I would rate it nine out of ten due to its robust functionality and capability to support inf...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for DX Infrastructure Manager?
The pricing of DX Unified Infrastructure Management is high and often a concern for customers. The cost is higher compared to other Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), which is feedback we hav...
 

Also Known As

No data available
DX Infrastructure Manager, DX Infrastructure Manager for Z Systems and CA UIM for zSystems, CA UIM (DX Infrastructure Manager), CA Nimsoft Monitor, CA UIM, DX Infrastructure Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
CBNCloud, IIJ Global Singapore, AT&S, AXSOS, Aozora Bank, HCL Technologies, IntelliNet, Securex
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmk vs. DX Unified Infrastructure Management and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.