No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

GroundWork Monitor 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

GroundWork Monitor
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
100th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
75th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
50th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
IT Operations Analytics (22nd)
Icinga
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
41st
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
48th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
32nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of GroundWork Monitor is 0.4%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 1.1%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Icinga1.1%
GroundWork Monitor0.4%
Other98.5%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

it_user186582 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr PC/Client Server Analyst II at a individual & family service with 10,001+ employees
It's easy to setup and the plugins are easy to write. When we need to, the threshold is easy to change.
It's easy to setup and the plugins are easy to write. When we need to, the threshold is easy to change It would be nice to have a centralized client-settings management. At the moment, the client settings have to be changed individually. I've used it since 2011. The deployment of the new server…
reviewer2292201 - PeerSpot reviewer
Innovation Service Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Easy to use, and it's possible to customize the product as per the needs we may have but average multi-tenancy aspect
It's supported by the community. We use Icinga, which is not part of the Open-Source platform but is wrapped into a commercial solution from another provider, a local provider in Italy. Icinga is an open-source platform, so it is supported by the community. It's quite easy to use, and it's possible to customize the product as per the needs we may have. So it's not expensive, and it's quite a general purpose. We can easily monitor any kind of infrastructure we encounter. 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. The alerting is the same as any other monitoring platform. It's not a "wow" feature that has changed our lives, but it's perfectly adequate.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's easy to setup and the plugins are easy to write."
"Icinga2 was designed to delegate, distribute and balance tasks between several nodes."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"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."
"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."
"People should know that it is simple and advanced."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is one that not many are even aware of, as Icinga has a self-healing event handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted, and you can configure the handler to take action after the critical alarm without human interaction."
 

Cons

"Deploying an agent leaves much to be desired."
"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."
"Network Discovery capabilities would be extremely helpful."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"The user interface should be improved."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"The connection between Icinga and Icinga Web."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"It's an open-source solution."
"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."
"The solution is cheap."
"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 solution is free to use."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
909,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
30%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Educational Organization
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
University
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
 

Also Known As

GWOS
Icinga Cloud Monitoring
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Swiss Life, JBFCS, Capital Markets Cooperative Research Centre
Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, SolarWinds, Datadog and others in Network Monitoring Software. Updated: August 2026.
909,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.