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

Icinga vs ManageEngine OpManager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 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

Icinga
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
17th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (7th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (16th), Cloud Monitoring Software (14th)
ManageEngine OpManager
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Icinga is 3.4%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ManageEngine OpManager is 1.6%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

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.
MUBDIUL ISLAM - PeerSpot reviewer
NetFlow monitoring has improved operations but needs better configurations
For the implementation part, I am facing issues when configuring the business view. When I create the business view, I experience problems with the port interface. When I add the interface, I am confused about which interface is connected to which endpoint. If identifying the interface was easier, it would take less time to configure. Another issue is with threshold values; sometimes, it shows kilobytes (kB) while our threshold is set to gigabytes. This can be confusing. Improving this aspect would be beneficial. In URL monitoring, there is room for enhancement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 drafts are easy but what I like about Icinga is that there are many add-ons that you can download."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"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."
"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."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"The ease of use and comprehensive integration are the most valuable features"
"Defining thresholds and other alerting criteria is fairly simple and would not require a lot of training. This is very useful if you are managing a large environment."
"This is a good general monitoring system that has all the features we require and they constantly update with new capabilities."
"The dashboard, versatility and larger horizon are valuable."
"The uptime and monitoring are valuable to us because we need to monitor the uptime of our services, the memory, and the CPUs."
"The solution is finely stable."
"The most valuable feature is the network-related reporting."
"Flexibility in the two view dashboard helps viewers and admins get the information they need about the fetwork in a flash."
 

Cons

"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"The user interface should be improved."
"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"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."
"I would like to see more capabilities and specific profiles built for the manufacturing sector."
"Real user and UI monitoring are not practical."
"We would like the solution's customize and build functionality to be more user-friendly."
"There are certain things that are not possible to do with Op Manager. It's a solution that still needs time to develop."
"The only problem with it is that the setup isn't very intuitive. I know that they just upgraded the product to make it a little bit easier to use, but compared to some of the other platforms, it is not easy to configure it, set it up, and get it running. However, once you have set it up and got it running, it runs great."
"ManageEngine OpManager could improve the default dashboards that are available. We are not able to customize them easily and they do not give us the information we need unless we customize them. You need to have the technical knowledge to be able to do it, the customization should be easier."
"The initial setup is a bit complicated. It needs a technician who is very aware of the flow and how to officially set up the flow chart, etc."
"The two views into the system are very good but could be extended to further customization to fit the need of end users in a variety of roles."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is free to use."
"The solution is cheap."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"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."
"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
"The solution is highly affordable"
"ManageEngine OpManager has a three-tier licensing model."
"Pricing for ManageEngine OpManager depends on the number of nodes you onboard and whatever pricing is reflected on the ManageEngine portal which offers discounts from ten percent to fifteen percent. It purely depends on the sales volume and the negotiation. In my organization, there are about one thousand two hundred nodes which cost around $29,000 per year. There's no additional support fee or maintenance fee from ManageEngine OpManager. Pricing for the solution is highly competitive and I would rate it five out of five. ManageEngine OpManager is one of the most competitive options out there."
"The product is not worth the money."
"In terms of pricing, I would rate it a two out of five. It was expensive."
"The pricing is moderate."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"It is not really expensive; it is nominal licensing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
31%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ManageEngine OpManager?
The pricing was okay. However, it has been increasing a lot lately. The product is not worth the money.
What needs improvement with ManageEngine OpManager?
For the implementation part, I am facing issues when configuring the business view. When I create the business view, I experience problems with the port interface. When I add the interface, I am co...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring
OpManager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Bonita, Thorp Reed & Armstrong, Galaxy, Fiserv Credit Union Division, Universitas 21 Global, ERP Suites LLC
Find out what your peers are saying about Icinga vs. ManageEngine OpManager and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.