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

Icinga vs NetFort LANGuardian 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)
NetFort LANGuardian
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
96th
Average Rating
10.0
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 NetFort LANGuardian is 0.3%, 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%
NetFort LANGuardian0.3%
Other98.4%
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.
it_user172854 - PeerSpot reviewer
Research Special Projects Lead at a university with 501-1,000 employees
Cost effective but when we originally purchased LANGuardian, some features needed further development.
The ability to detect and decipher torrent traffic for the purpose of identifying what some refer to as "copyright violators" Our CIO asked us to track down the source of undesired uploads, which trigger e-mails received by outside bodies regarding what they refer to as "copyright violations",…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"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."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"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."
"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."
"Icinga2 was designed to delegate, distribute and balance tasks between several nodes."
"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."
"If you are looking for a solid solution that can be easily deployed then I'd recommend considering Netfort solutions."
"Our CIO asked us to track down the source of undesired uploads, which trigger e-mails received by outside bodies regarding what they refer to as "copyright violations", and Languardian was the most efficient and effective tool for the job."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"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 user interface should be improved."
"It takes a long time to load results. I think it would be great if they fix the slowness issue in the next release."
"Sure, at the time we bought the product, the GUI and graphs/reports/pie charts etc ... were not fully developed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"The solution is free to use."
"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."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The solution is cheap."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
894,807 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%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring
LANGuardian
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
City of Armadale, NCG Group, King Faisal Hospital
Find out what your peers are saying about Icinga vs. NetFort LANGuardian and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.