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

Icinga vs OpenText Network Operations Management 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
41st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (17th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (48th), Cloud Monitoring Software (32nd)
OpenText Network Operations...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
59th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Icinga is 1.1%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Network Operations Management is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Icinga1.1%
OpenText Network Operations Management0.4%
Other98.5%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2292201 - PeerSpot reviewer
Innovation Service Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Easy to use, and it's possible to customize the product as per the needs we may have but average multi-tenancy aspect
It's supported by the community. We use Icinga, which is not part of the Open-Source platform but is wrapped into a commercial solution from another provider, a local provider in Italy. Icinga is an open-source platform, so it is supported by the community. It's quite easy to use, and it's possible to customize the product as per the needs we may have. So it's not expensive, and it's quite a general purpose. We can easily monitor any kind of infrastructure we encounter. 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. The alerting is the same as any other monitoring platform. It's not a "wow" feature that has changed our lives, but it's perfectly adequate.
AhmedBahgat - PeerSpot reviewer
Advisor at Saudi Telecom Company
Dynamic discovery and effective network topology make IT monitoring valuable
The solution enables dynamic discovery and incorporates a powerful configuration management database, CMDB, along with a strong correlation engine. It covers the entire span of the infrastructure, including servers and network operations. It also adapts well to different environments, showing network topology effectively, making the network monitoring tool quite valuable.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"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."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"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."
"Icinga2 was designed to delegate, distribute and balance tasks between several nodes."
"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."
"We can detect non-compliant devices and automate remediation actions to cover the gap in the configuration standards."
"The solution enables dynamic discovery and incorporates a powerful configuration management database, CMDB, along with a strong correlation engine."
"When it comes to customization, Micro Focus is more mature than its competitors."
 

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 tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"Sometimes, it is very hard to keep an overview of what's happening."
"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."
"Icinga is a complex solution that's hard to learn. It's a powerful product for monitoring, but new users will have a hard time figuring out what to do."
"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."
"The user interface is outdated and needs improvement, especially for service and topology maps."
"Micro Focus Network Management doesn't support end-to-end monitoring of cloud infrastructure."
"Micro Focus Network Management doesn't support end-to-end monitoring of cloud infrastructure. Micro Focus might have different cloud solutions for cloud automation and hybrid cloud management. There are a lot of products that also support automation. That is different, but it should monitor the cloud from an IT operations management perspective."
"It may need a more customizable UI."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It's an open-source solution."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"The solution is cheap."
"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."
"Micro Focus' price is on the higher side, but there are other products like CA products and IBM that are more expensive. At the same time, you have to compare the maturity level of the solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
910,005 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
University
9%
Construction Company
25%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Healthcare 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

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Network Operations Management?
The user interface is outdated and needs improvement, especially for service and topology maps. The ease of generating dashboards for different situations by users is critical for my environment. I...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Network Operations Management?
I use the solution as the main vehicle to monitor and alert about events in the IT environment. I use it for IT monitoring.
 

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring
Micro Focus Network Operations Management
 

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. OpenText Network Operations Management and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
910,005 professionals have used our research since 2012.