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
101st
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
76th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
49th
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
37th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
48th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
34th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of GroundWork Monitor is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 1.2%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Icinga1.2%
GroundWork Monitor0.4%
Other98.4%
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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
 

Cons

"Deploying an agent leaves much to be desired."
"It is not really adequate for our current needs. It causes additional issues which we have to work around and takes us time that a better solution would not."
"The connection between Icinga and Icinga Web."
"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."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"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 installation and configuration are very complex."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"Network Discovery capabilities would be extremely helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution is free to use."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."
"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"The solution is cheap."
"It's an open-source solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
902,495 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
28%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Educational Organization
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
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, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software. Updated: June 2026.
902,495 professionals have used our research since 2012.