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

CloudVision vs Icinga comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

CloudVision
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
28th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Icinga
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (19th), Server Monitoring (11th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (27th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Cloud Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of CloudVision is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 3.9%, up from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Icinga3.9%
CloudVision0.1%
Other96.0%
Cloud Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

NP
Clients experience effective network management and comprehensive monitoring
Arista currently provides their solution for their own Arista products only. A problem occurs because customers do not have only Arista products. Sometimes they have different kinds of products available in their network. For monitoring that network, they have to either procure more solutions from third parties or they have to procure the provider OEM to manage their switches. If Arista can integrate third-party switches for monitoring purposes, it will be beneficial for the customers. Arista and other competitors such as Cisco or HPE Aruba have their own benefits. Cisco and Aruba face the challenge of having multiple OS for networking their products, whereas Arista has a single OS across their products. This is very beneficial for customers as they only have to manage a single OS.
Harrison Bulley - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"A single point of management and monitoring, as well as upgradation and update is valuable."
"The product provides a central management feature. It helps in eliminating human errors. It doesn't have a lot of bugs for software."
"The product provides a central management feature. It helps in eliminating human errors. It doesn't have a lot of bugs for software."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"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."
"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."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"The drafts are easy but what I like about Icinga is that there are many add-ons that you can download."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
 

Cons

"CloudVision could have a user-friendly interface."
"CloudVision could have a user-friendly interface."
"Arista currently provides their solution for their own Arista products only. A problem occurs because customers do not have only Arista products."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"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."
"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."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"The user interface should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CloudVision is an expensive product. We purchase its yearly license."
"CloudVision is an expensive product. We purchase its yearly license."
"It's an open-source solution."
"The solution is cheap."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"The solution is free to use."
"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."
"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.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Comms Service Provider
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Educational Organization
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with CloudVision?
Arista currently provides their solution for their own Arista products only. A problem occurs because customers do not have only Arista products. Sometimes they have different kinds of products ava...
What is your primary use case for CloudVision?
We are using the same products. We implement CloudVision, but have not implemented the security portion of that.
What advice do you have for others considering CloudVision?
It depends upon the nature of the business of the customers. If a customer is in the finance sector and they require very fast reply time, then they have a larger benefit compared to normal manufac...
What do you like most about Icinga?
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.
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...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

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 CloudVision vs. Icinga and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.