Icinga vs Loom Systems comparison

Icinga and ServiceNow are both solutions in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category. Icinga is ranked #30 with an average rating of 7.0, while ServiceNow is ranked #60. Icinga holds a 2.4% mindshare in IM, compared to ServiceNow’s 0.6% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Icinga users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of ServiceNow users who would recommend it.

Icinga

Read 17 Icinga reviews

4,206 Views
3,281 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Loom Systems

Read 4 Loom Systems reviews

739 Views
562 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

Icinga

Loom Systems

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Icinga and Loom Systems compete in the IT monitoring space. Loom Systems appears to hold an advantage due to its use of AI-driven analytics.

Features: Icinga includes dynamic monitoring, extensive customization, and strong integration support. Loom Systems offers AI-powered predictive analytics, automatic anomaly detection, and proactive insights.

Room for Improvement: Icinga can enhance its AI capabilities, improve real-time analytics, and streamline its user interface. Loom Systems may benefit from expanding its integration options, reducing its initial implementation costs, and increasing support for open-source platforms.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Icinga offers straightforward deployment with robust community support, while Loom Systems emphasizes a streamlined deployment with professional service guidance.

Pricing and ROI: Icinga boasts low initial costs due to its open-source architecture, providing a favorable ROI for budget-conscious users. Loom Systems requires higher upfront investment, justified by its advanced AI features, offering significant ROI for innovation-focused organizations.

To learn more, read our detailed Icinga vs. Loom Systems Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Icinga vs. Loom Systems

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 880,745 peers since 2012

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

Icinga

Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring

30th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Network Monitoring Software (25th), Server Monitoring (13th), Cloud Monitoring Software (23rd)

Loom Systems

Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring

60th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Anomaly Detection Tools (4th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Icinga is 2.4%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Loom Systems is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

IT Infrastructure Monitoring Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Icinga	2.4%
Loom Systems	0.6%
Other	97.0%

IT Infrastructure Monitoring

Featured Reviews

Harrison Bulley

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.

Read full review

Keerthi Kumar Sangaraju

Technology Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Stable, easy to set up, flexible, and has multiple functionalities, but needs to define priority levels for each incident

What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."

"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."

"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."

"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."

"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."

"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."

"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."

"We have found the solution to be stable."

More Icinga pros

"The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."

"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."

"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."

"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."

Cons

"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."

"Icinga’s automation could be improved."

"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."

"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."

"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."

"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 solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."

More Icinga cons

"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."

"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."

"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"

"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's an open-source solution."

"We're using the free version of Icinga."

"This is an open-source solution with paid support."

"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."

"The solution is cheap."

"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."

"The solution is free to use."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

14%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	7

No data available

Questions from the Community

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Zabbix vs Icinga

Compared 28% of the time

Nagios Core vs Icinga

Compared 13% of the time

Checkmk vs Icinga

Compared 8% of the time

Nagios XI vs Icinga

Compared 5% of the time

SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor vs Icinga

Compared 4% of the time

More Icinga Competitors

DX Unified Infrastructure Management vs Loom Systems

Compared 19% of the time

Splunk Observability Cloud vs Loom Systems

Compared 19% of the time

SolarWinds NPM vs Loom Systems

Compared 18% of the time

Huawei eSight vs Loom Systems

Compared 13% of the time

Moogsoft vs Loom Systems

Compared 11% of the time

More Loom Systems Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Icinga

January 2026

Download Icinga product report

Buyer's Guide

IT Infrastructure Monitoring

December 2025

Download Loom Systems product report

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring

No data available

Overview

Icinga is a robust tool for monitoring IT infrastructure, known for its distributed monitoring capabilities and seamless integration with multiple platforms. It efficiently observes servers, network devices, and environments like Linux and Windows, enabling proactive issue identification and resource management.

With a focus on task delegation and clustering, Icinga offers an intuitive interface through its GUI and Icinga Director, simplifying configuration. The extensive plugin library supports diverse technologies, while the API allows automation with tools like Terraform and Ansible. Despite its strengths, users report challenges with data display in the GUI, a need for improved dashboards, and complex configuration processes. Users benefit from its SNMP alerts, email notifications, and automated incident handling, making it essential for managed service environments and enterprises.

What are the key features of Icinga?

Task Delegation: Streamlines monitoring tasks across distributed systems.
Event Handler: Enables automatic service recovery with minimal intervention.
Plugin Library: Offers extensive support for integrating diverse technologies.
API Accessibility: Facilitates automation with popular tools like Terraform.
Custom Plugins: Allows easy creation and personalization for monitoring needs.

What benefits should you consider in Icinga reviews?

Flexibility: Tailors monitoring to specific requirements with community support.
Scalability: Successfully manages growing infrastructure demands.
Proactivity: Enhances issue identification and resource allocation.
Integration: Seamlessly works with existing IT operations platforms.

Icinga is widely adopted in IT environments for monitoring servers, networks, and applications across industries such as finance, healthcare, and technology. Its ability to integrate with various operating systems and automation platforms makes it a versatile choice for industries prioritizing comprehensive surveillance and proactive management of their infrastructure.

Icinga

Loom Systems delivers an advanced AI-powered operational analytics platform to predict and prevent problems in the digital business. DevOps & IT teams use Loom for real-time detection and resolution for any type of application, including home-grown. Loom analyzes logs and metrics in all formats, performs smart correlations and root cause analysis to help organizations gain immediate into their environments. Loom stands alone in the industry as an AI platform requiring no prior math knowledge from its operators, leveraging your existing staff to succeed in the digital era. Getting started is easy - zero configuration and data pre-processing needed, so you can stream your data in its raw format.

ServiceNow

Sample Customers

Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre

Citrix, Amdocs, Sysaid, Hexaware, Effibar, Revtrak, Taptica

Buyer's Guide

Icinga vs. Loom Systems

January 2026

Free Report: Icinga vs. Loom Systems

Find out what your peers are saying about Icinga vs. Loom Systems and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Icinga vs. Loom Systems 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.