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

Icinga vs Marvis Virtual Network Assistant 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
27th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (12th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (31st), Cloud Monitoring Software (26th)
Marvis Virtual Network Assi...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
50th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Icinga is 1.3%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Icinga1.3%
Marvis Virtual Network Assistant0.4%
Other98.3%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

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.
PRADIPJOSHI - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at Shree Atharva Sales Corporation
Used for troubleshooting and receiving real-time alerts and works on artificial intelligence
I always recommend Marvis to every customer because it requires no additional direct involvement. Marvis has been developed well using AI and machine learning technology. Its AI engine updates itself regularly, which is a beneficial feature. I request that Juniper integrate a cloud identity engine and simplify the Microsoft Azure Active Directory Services integration with the SRX hardware firewall. Additionally, the SRX firewall needs a more robust graphical user interface. Currently, we can only configure the SRX using the CLI; if a wrong command is entered, restoring it cannot be easy. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"People should know that it is simple and advanced."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"The drafts are easy but what I like about Icinga is that there are many add-ons that you can download."
"If you have a small infrastructure or a small number of devices that you want to monitor, then I think it's a good solution."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"I would recommend Icinga; it's an open-source solution, it's quite easy and simple to use, and checks can be run with Python code and Shell Script code."
"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."
"If you ask any questions about Marvis, it will respond immediately and use some solution. It will be very easy and save you time."
"Marvis Virtual Network Assistant uses AI to find problems or to get information from devices."
 

Cons

"Scalability is problematic. If you have a stable environment it's good, but if the environment is growing, I had some problems with Icinga."
"The user interface should be improved."
"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."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"Sometimes, it is very hard to keep an overview of what's happening."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"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."
"It would be a good idea to integrate the solution to support other vendors besides Juniper."
"It should add real-time application visibility."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is free to use."
"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"It's an open-source solution."
"The solution is cheap."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
"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."
"Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is not an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
18%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
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...
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
Marvis Virtual Network Assistant is not an expensive solution. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
It should add real-time application visibility. Marvis's interface is good. We don't need any additional interface. However, if it could accept voice commands, that would be a great improvement
What is your primary use case for Marvis Virtual Network Assistant?
It is mainly used for troubleshooting and receiving real-time alerts. Marvis makes it easy to track the issue by providing specific information, like the exact time the connection was lost. It simp...
 

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Icinga vs. Marvis Virtual Network Assistant and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.