Icinga vs Pico Corvil Analytics comparison

Icinga and PICO are both solutions in the Network Monitoring Software category. Icinga is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.3, while PICO is ranked #74. Icinga holds a 3.3% mindshare in NMS, compared to PICO’s 0.4% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Icinga users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of PICO users who would recommend it.

Icinga

Read 17 Icinga reviews

3,915 Views
3,445 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Pico Corvil Analytics

Read 9 Pico Corvil Analytics reviews

1,134 Views
975 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Icinga

Pico Corvil Analytics

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 2024

Icinga and Pico Corvil Analytics compete in the monitoring and analytics domain. Pico Corvil Analytics seems to have the upper hand due to its robust features, which justify its higher cost.

Features: Icinga offers flexibility, robust monitoring capabilities, and an open-source nature that supports integration with a range of systems. Pico Corvil Analytics provides real-time data processing, in-depth analytics, and network performance monitoring.

Room for Improvement: Icinga could improve in simplifying user interface navigation, enhancing custom alerting features, and supporting more operating systems natively. Pico Corvil Analytics might work on reducing deployment complexity, offering more affordable pricing options, and improving documentation for user guides.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Pico Corvil Analytics employs a straightforward, cloud-centric deployment approach, ensuring rapid implementation with excellent support. Icinga requires more management effort due to its diverse open-source framework but benefits from a strong community support network.

Pricing and ROI: Icinga provides an attractive initial investment with dependable ROI due to its lower setup costs and open-source model. Pico Corvil Analytics requires greater upfront investment but promises a significant return through enhanced operational efficiency.

To learn more, read our detailed Icinga vs. Pico Corvil Analytics Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Icinga vs. Pico Corvil Analytics

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 862,289 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in other categories

Server Monitoring (12th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (25th), Cloud Monitoring Software (18th)

Pico Corvil Analytics

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

74th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Icinga is 3.3%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pico Corvil Analytics is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Network Monitoring Software

Featured Reviews

Harrison Bulley

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.

Read full review

Ted Hruzd

Founder at AI Fit LLC

Helpful support agents, beneficial issue detection, and high availability

The creation of charts and real-time windows was somewhat cumbersome. The vendor's website had an application called App Agent that required improvement. This API was designed to track message rates between microservers ingested into a microservice memory map. It allowed users to monitor the number of transactions that occurred at specific points within the application, and it was quite impressive. However, it had some limitations, and it mainly served as a tool for basic tracking. The protocols it employed could reveal the type of server-to-server communication and the specific order types, but it was not able to provide a more in-depth analysis of the application. The vendor has the potential to integrate application metrics more extensively into their product suite. The product suite could benefit from more out-of-the-box predictive analytics capabilities, such as projecting market or symbol movements. However, it is unclear whether the vendor currently provides this functionality. Users may need to adjust their software to perform such analysis independently.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have found the solution to be stable."

"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."

"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."

"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."

"The drafts are easy but what I like about Icinga is that there are many add-ons that you can download."

"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."

"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."

"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."

More Icinga pros

"We're able to quickly drill down and find answers to events that are happening in real-time, using Corvil's analytics tools. That's the feature which is most in the spotlight..."

"With the Corvil Stored Data Analyzer module, we can use it for test data or a set of production data to set up the configuration for latency setup, so we can use the fields to correlate messages."

"We can use CLI with the UI for configuring the new monitoring system, which is good."

"We use the data to analyze how much time we spend within the applications. Then, based on that, we are doing multiple analyses and types of investigations to work on reducing the amount of time spent on the latency, which helps our applications."

"The performance metrics are pretty good. We've got everything from the network layer to the actual application layer. We can see what's going on with things like sending time and batching."

"The analytics features of Corvil are really good... As long as you know what the field is in the message, you can build your metrics based on that field... It means you can do the analytics that you actually care for. You can customize it..."

"What is most valuable is the ability to troubleshoot when a client complains of spikes in latencies. It gives us the ability to go granular, all the way down to looking at the network packets and analyze them."

"Time-series graphs are very good for performance analysis. We can do comparisons... We can say this is the latency in the last 24 hours, and this was the same 24-hour period a week ago and overlay the two time-series graphs on top of each other, so we can see the difference. That's a really powerful tool for us."

More Pico Corvil Analytics pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"The installation and configuration are very complex."

"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."

"The user interface should be improved."

"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."

"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."

More Icinga cons

"I have seen errors where the CNE and the CMC haven't synced because of something missing in the CMC, which was there in the CNE. We would get some type of error, but it doesn't actually say what exactly was missing in the CNE."

"Overall, the Corvil device needs a little bit of training for people to handle it. If that could be reduced and made more user-friendly, more intuitive, it would be better."

"For FIX protocol, maybe we could have built-in configurations for signatures and decoders. Also, for certain protocols, which are newer, we would like to just add the signatures within the decoders itself."

"It's quite difficult to see, sometimes, how hard your Corvil is working. When we had a very busy feed that chucked out a lot of data it wasn't working very well on Corvil. We had to raise a case for it. It turned out to be that, in fact, we were overloading Corvil."

"The analytics feature is very nice, but it's mostly software. We are hoping that it could be embedded in ASICs, so it could be faster."

"While the product is scalable, it's not easy to scale. It needs investment hardware and network bandwidth consideration. It's not something you can just do overnight."

"The creation of charts and real-time windows was somewhat cumbersome. The vendor's website had an application called App Agent that required improvement. This API was designed to track message rates between microservers ingested into a microservice memory map. It allowed users to monitor the number of transactions that occurred at specific points within the application, and it was quite impressive. However, it had some limitations, and it mainly served as a tool for basic tracking. The protocols it employed could reveal the type of server-to-server communication and the specific order types, but it was not able to provide a more in-depth analysis of the application. The vendor has the potential to integrate application metrics more extensively into their product suite."

"In terms of performance analysis, if you really want to dig down into the minutiae and get statistics on the important things... that would be the only piece lacking because, in our environment, we have thousands and thousands of symbols. With the architecture that Corvil is built on, it's cumbersome."

More Pico Corvil Analytics cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."

"The solution is free to use."

"This is an open-source solution with paid support."

"The solution is cheap."

"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."

"We're using the free version of Icinga."

"It's an open-source solution."

"As I am working more with Corvil, it looks like it is improving diagnostic times."

"The pricing is very expensive. Corvil could work on the pricing."

"I like the way they've decoupled the hardware now... Everything's based on the licensing side now. The way they do the packs is fair. It's very flexible in that we're not charged per decoder, we're charged for a certain pack. Whether we use one decoder or 20 decoders, as long as they're in the same pack, there's no extra charge. Expensive but fair is how I'd summarize it."

"It is pricey versus its competitors."

"We bought a box from Corvil and it was $200,000 for one big CNE. Then there are obviously the recurring maintenance fees. The licensing is perpetual but the maintenance fees are not."

"Corvil has reduced the time it takes us to isolate root causes."

"Pico Corvil Analytics is expensive. There are several competitors in the market. Selling this solution to a trading firm might be challenging as there are several other solutions available that can perform basic similar operations, such as using Wireshark and Python scripts to obtain the required values. However, that does not nearly approach the comprehensive end-2-end automated depth of metrics and their correlations that Pico Corvil Analytics provides."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

862,289 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

12%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

56%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Zabbix vs Icinga

Compared 42% of the time

Nagios Core vs Icinga

Compared 22% of the time

Checkmk vs Icinga

Compared 10% of the time

Nagios XI vs Icinga

Compared 4% of the time

Centreon vs Icinga

Compared 3% of the time

More Icinga Competitors

NETSCOUT nGeniusONE vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 31% of the time

Datadog vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 25% of the time

ExtraHop Reveal(x) vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 17% of the time

NIKSUN NetVCR vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 14% of the time

AppNeta by Broadcom vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 13% of the time

More Pico Corvil Analytics Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Icinga

July 2025

Download Icinga product report

Buyer's Guide

Pico Corvil Analytics

June 2025

Download Pico Corvil Analytics product report

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring

Corvil

Overview

Icinga monitors systems, network devices, infrastructure, and services, helping manage and analyze server resources. It automates ticket incidents and alerting, providing oversight of client Windows and Linux systems.

Icinga offers comprehensive monitoring of servers including CPU utilization and RAM space, facilitating automated incident management and alerting. Frequently deployed on-premises, this monitoring tool is key for managed services providers and organizations to oversee and ensure optimal performance of various environments, including applications like databases and web servers. It provides extensive features for creating custom plugins, stabilization, scalability, and high customization capabilities suitable for different infrastructure needs.

What are the key features of Icinga?

Event Handler: Facilitates automatic self-healing of systems.
Extensive Plugin Library: Offers a wide range of plugins for monitoring.
Ease of Use: Simplifies user experience with an intuitive interface and Icinga Director for easy configurations.
Open-Source Nature: Free to use, modify, and distribute.
Automation Capabilities: Integrates with APIs and Ansible Collections for automation.
Custom Plugins: Users can create and integrate their own plugins.
Stability and Scalability: Provides reliable performance across different scale infrastructures.

What are the benefits or ROI to look for when evaluating Icinga?

Critical Issue Highlighting: Effectively identifies and notifies about critical problems.
High Customization: Offers flexibility for diverse monitoring needs.
Automated Alerting: Reduces manual effort and improves response times.
Extensive Integration: Works seamlessly with other tools and platforms.

Icinga implementations span multiple industries, providing essential monitoring for IT infrastructure in healthcare, finance, and education. Managed services providers utilize Icinga to maintain and monitor client systems across various environments while ensuring optimal performance and compliance. It is highly valued in these sectors for its ability to customize monitoring, improving operational efficiency and reducing downtime.

Icinga

Corvil transforms Network Data with speed and precision into the powerful real-time truth. Corvil captures, decodes, reassembles, and enriches vast amounts of data in motion, adding analytics and making the resulting enriched data and IT Operations Analytics available to humans, machines and other systems.

PICO

Sample Customers

Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre

NASDAQ, Commerzbank, Pico Quantitative Trading, CME Group, Interactive Data, Tokyo Stock Exchange Inc.

Buyer's Guide

Icinga vs. Pico Corvil Analytics

July 2025

Free Report: Icinga vs. Pico Corvil Analytics

Find out what your peers are saying about Icinga vs. Pico Corvil Analytics and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

862,289 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Icinga vs. Pico Corvil Analytics report.

See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.

We monitor all Network Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.