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

Goliath Performance Monitor vs Icinga comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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

Goliath Performance Monitor
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
61st
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Icinga
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
30th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (25th), Server Monitoring (13th), Cloud Monitoring Software (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Goliath Performance Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 2.4%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Icinga2.4%
Goliath Performance Monitor0.5%
Other97.1%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

networke29316 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 201-500 employees
Monitors well with Citrix, stable, and the support is very responsive
It looks like it is easy to scale, but I don't know how far it can go out. We are only a 300, or 400 person company. We are not terribly large. It looks like it should be able to scale up until 10,000 at least. There are two users in the company who use this solution, I use it, and the helpdesk.
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

"I like that it not only has the ability to monitor but that it can do a lot of specific Citrix monitoring."
"Offers a diversity of features."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"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 value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."
"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."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"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."
 

Cons

"Issues with generating reports; consistency is not there."
"I would love to be able to tell what ISP the user is coming from."
"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."
"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."
"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."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."
"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."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price seems reasonable."
"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."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
"The solution is free to use."
"It's an open-source solution."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
17%
Healthcare Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Performing Arts
6%
Educational Organization
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

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

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Icinga Cloud Monitoring
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Facebook, Xerox, UHS, ADP, Wyndham Worldwide
Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Find out what your peers are saying about Goliath Performance Monitor vs. Icinga and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.