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

Checkmk vs Icinga 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
9th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
27th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
18th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Icinga
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
23rd
Ranking in Server Monitoring
13th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
28th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
21st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Checkmk is 3.0%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 2.2%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmk3.0%
Icinga2.2%
Other94.8%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1704309 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Administrator at a construction company with 201-500 employees
Utilizing data monitoring capabilities and scripting potential to optimize system management
I frequently program functions with PowerShell, and although Bash could be used, my specialization is in PowerShell. Two of us focus on programming in PowerShell for infrastructure optimization. I set up a dedicated server to run scripts every hour, generating files for Checkmk output. However, Checkmk does not allow running scripts at varying intervals. I am working on this in the raw version of Checkmk.
Harrison Bulley - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Infrastructure Engineer at Net Consulting
A stable, scalable and cost-effective solution that helps with inbuilt scripts for easy modification
I think the software is quite good, but we have had problems with getting it to recognize certain areas and amend certain checks, where we needed so we would have to create backend scripts for those checks. Though, being open source, it has the support to create backend scripts, it would be better to have these scripts in-built.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Checkmk helps me compare data and foresee issues."
"The most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."
"Checkmk was built on a platform that was user-friendly, and I could build my charts easily."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"Overall, from one to ten, I rate Checkmk a nine."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"The alerting system in Checkmk really works properly."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
"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."
"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."
"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."
 

Cons

"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"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."
"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."
"Checkmk does not allow running scripts at varying intervals."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"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."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"I think the software is quite good, but we have had problems with getting it to recognize certain areas and amend certain checks, where we needed so we would have to create backend scripts for those checks. Though, being open source, it has the support to create backend scripts, it would be better to have these scripts in-built."
"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"The user interface should be improved."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is affordable."
"The price of Checkmk is cheaper compared to other enterprise products."
"Checkmk is a fairly reasonably priced solution."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"It's an open-source solution."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The solution is free to use."
"The solution is cheap."
"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Educational Organization
13%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

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 advice do you have for others considering Checkmk?
I would rate Checkmk an eight out of ten, not knowing the final report.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Icinga?
It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low. If you want to include this product in the services you offer to your customers, the return on i...
What needs improvement with Icinga?
There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved. For instance, multi-tenancy for monitoring the virtual infrastructur...
What is your primary use case for Icinga?
We use Icinga as a monitoring solution to monitor customers' infrastructures. We work as a managed service provider, so we offer monitoring and many other services to our customers. So we use it in...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Icinga Cloud Monitoring
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmk vs. Icinga and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.