We performed a comparison between Checkmk and Stackify 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 most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"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."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"The filter feature on Stackify is one of the features I found valuable. It's awesome. When I want to get the application logs, the solution gives me many filters. For example, if I want to get logs from my test environment, the option is there for me to select the environment from Stackify, and you can also select the particular application, and you'll see the information you need there. The filter feature alone and the fact that Stackify offers a lot of different filters is what I like the most about the solution because I've used other tools with the filter feature, but the filtering was very difficult, versus Stackify that has good filtering. On Stackify, you can filter the information by the last one hour, or the last four hours, and you can also select the date range and specify the timestamp, then the solution will give you the information based on the date range you specified. Another feature I found valuable on Stackify is its rating feature because it tells you how your application is faring. For example, a rating of A means excellent, while a rating of F means very bad, or that your application is not doing well at all. The ratings are from A to F. I also like that Stackify helps you in terms of load management because the solution gives you information on overutilized resources. These are the most valuable features of the solution."
"The deployment is very fast."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"The performance dashboard and the accurate level of details are beneficial."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"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."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"I've not used Stackify for a while, and I'm currently using a solution now that's not as good as Stackify. Among the solutions I've been using so far, Stackify has been one of the best for me, but there's always room for improvement. For example, I don't know if it's just me, but when I try to get the log from Stackify, sometimes it doesn't appear in real-time. It takes a few minutes before the logs appear. When I redeploy my solution and the application starts, I don't see the logs immediately, and it would take two to three minutes before I see the logs. I don't know if other customers have a similar experience. It's the wait time for the logs to appear that's a concern for me, could be improved, and is what the Stackify team should be looking into. In terms of any additional feature that I'd like added to the solution, I'm not sure if Stackify has a way to export logs out. I've been trying to do it. On the solution, you can click on a spiral-like icon and it shows you the entire error, and I'd prefer an export button that would let me download the error and save that into a text file, for example, so it'll be available on my local machine for me to reference it, especially because the log keeps going and as you're using the solution, the system keeps pushing messages on to Stackify, so if I'm looking at a particular error at 12:05 PM, for example, by the time I go back to my system and would like to revisit the error at 12:25 PM, on Stackify, the logs would have gone past that level and I won't see it again which makes it difficult. When you now go back to that timestamp, you don't tend to see it immediately, but if the solution had an export feature for me to save that particular error information on my local machine for reference at a later time, I won't have to go back to Stackify. I just go to that log, specifically to that particular export that I've received on my local machine. I can get it and review it, and it would be easier that way versus me going back to Stackify to find that particular error and request that particular information."
"I would like to be able to see metrics about individual running containers on the host machines."
"It should be easily scalable and configurable in different instances."
"The search feature could be improved."
Checkmk is ranked 20th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 6 reviews while Stackify is ranked 48th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 6 reviews. Checkmk is rated 8.6, while Stackify is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Checkmk writes "A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Stackify writes "Easy to set up with great custom dashboards but needs to improve non-.NET infrastructure". Checkmk is most compared with Zabbix, Icinga, Netdata, Centreon and Observium, whereas Stackify is most compared with New Relic, AppDynamics and Dynatrace. See our Checkmk vs. Stackify 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.
