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

Icinga vs NetMon comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2025

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
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (13th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (28th), Cloud Monitoring Software (22nd)
NetMon
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
58th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Icinga is 3.1%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetMon is 0.3%, down from 0.4% 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.
AshishDubey - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and scalable tool useful for network behavior analysis, DPA, and network forensic services
I have not worked much on LogRhythm NetMon to be able to comment on what needs improvement in the product since there is another team in our company that is working on the solution presently. LogRhythm NetMon's pricing model is an area of concern that should be made a little bit cheaper in comparison to the other players in the market currently. With players like IBM QRadar that propose QNI or Darktrace in the market, LogRhythm NetMon needs to consider a reduction in its pricing model.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"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 value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"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."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"Visibility is a valuable feature, the ability to see even if the traffic is not going into the firewall"
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the log, which can be analyzed by our SIEM solution."
"NetMon's best feature is traffic analysis."
"LogRhythm NetMon's most impressive feature is that it's a bundled package, so you're not just relying on monthly data; you get a six-month view for more comprehensive indicators of compromise. This dual approach is precious. We implement LogRhythm NetMon in our cybersecurity strategy mainly for compliance and correlation of network, user, and decision activities, particularly for network firewalls and access control."
"The analytics feature is the most valuable feature."
"It has a very strong artificial intelligence engine."
"The protocols with which you see the traffic for a particular website that a client has in their environment, for example, are valuable. We can monitor whether the traffic is up to the mark or whether they need to add more bandwidth. Also, we can see if we're able to get real-time environment data as well. The customization dashboard is really good. LogRhythm NetMon has its own in-built dashboards which are helpful in guiding customization."
 

Cons

"The user interface should be improved."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."
"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."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"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."
"Could use a topology diagram which would help get an exact visual."
"There is an issue with tunneling in relation to how the connectivity is established between the end devices and where NetMon is installed. On the console, I often observe that there's a difference of a few seconds or maybe a minute, and this lag time should not be there."
"Some of the automated tasks we can perform on QRadar cannot be performed on LogRhythm because the solution has limitations."
"LogRhythm NetMon's pricing model is an area of concern that should be made a little bit cheaper in comparison to the other players in the market currently."
"The main concern is that LogRhythm has not improved NetMon but instead introduced a separate product, which many customers, including us, would prefer to be integrated into a single platform for easier management."
"The training for this product is not very good and needs to be improved."
"The platform's integration features often need to be improved."
"Sometimes it's hard to find the network devices' self-audit logs."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"It's an open-source solution."
"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."
"The solution is free to use."
"The solution is cheap."
"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"Pricing is okay. There were some competitors that were extremely expensive and there were some which were really inexpensive but LogRhythm stayed in the middle of them."
"The product is expensive for smaller companies."
"The price of this solution is too high, so it should be made more practical and more valuable for the customer."
"I don't have visibility into the pricing of LogRhythm NetMon as it's handled through our commercial partnerships."
"LogRhythm's licensing part is something that depends on the license you want since they offer it on a perpetual and subscription basis."
"NetMon's licensing costs about $85k per year, with some extra costs for support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
No data available
 

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 do you like most about LogRhythm NetMon?
It has a very strong artificial intelligence engine.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogRhythm NetMon?
I don't have visibility into the pricing of LogRhythm NetMon as it's handled through our commercial partnerships.
What needs improvement with LogRhythm NetMon?
The main concern is that LogRhythm has not improved NetMon but instead introduced a separate product, which many customers, including us, would prefer to be integrated into a single platform for ea...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring
LogRhythm Network Monitor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Sera-Brynn
Find out what your peers are saying about Icinga vs. NetMon and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.