Icinga vs Pico Corvil Analytics comparison

Icinga and PICO are both solutions in the Network Monitoring Software category. Icinga is ranked #19 with an average rating of 8.0, while PICO is ranked #71. Icinga holds a 2.8% mindshare in NMS, compared to PICO’s 0.5% 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

3,873 Views
3,370 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Pico Corvil Analytics

Read 9 Pico Corvil Analytics reviews

1,247 Views
1,060 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: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Icinga vs. Pico Corvil Analytics

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,785 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

19th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Server Monitoring (11th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (27th), Cloud Monitoring Software (20th)

Pico Corvil Analytics

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

71st

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Icinga is 2.8%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pico Corvil Analytics is 0.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Icinga	2.8%
Pico Corvil Analytics	0.5%
Other	96.7%

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

"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."

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

"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."

"We have found the solution to be stable."

"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."

"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."

"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."

More Icinga pros

"It has all the decoders so it's capturing every network packet and it's decoding in real-time and it's giving us latency information in real-time... It's the real-time decoding and getting the latency information statistics that we find the most useful."

"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."

"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."

"We like the dashboards because they essentially organize all the sessions into one viewpoint."

"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."

"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."

"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..."

"As part of my role in monitoring multiple client connections, I would use Pico Corvil Analytics to set up alerts for performance issues, such as TCP resends and dropped packets. These alerts would trigger when the volume was low and performance was poor, allowing me to work with our trading partners to find a resolution. I would present them with the statistics I had and together, we would identify the source of the issue. This collaboration resulted in the client often reconfiguring their systems. For example, we may find that a network connection needed to be made. Overall, this proactive approach helped to maintain strong connections with our clients and minimize disruptions to trading revenue."

More Pico Corvil Analytics pros

Cons

"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."

"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."

"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."

"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."

"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."

"The installation and configuration are very complex."

"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."

More Icinga cons

"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."

"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 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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"Before I got the Corvil training... one thing that was not very efficient was that every time you had to create a new stream or a new session from within Corvil... you had to tell it what protocol the message is going to come through and how to correlate messages, etc... After I went for the training, they had already added these nice features in the 9.4 version where it could do auto-discovery... Based on the traffic that it has already seen, it could create sessions on the fly."

"There is definitely room for improvement in the reporting. We've tried to use the reporting in Corvil but, to me, it feels like a bolt-on, like not a lot of thought has gone into it. The whole interface where you build reports and schedule them is very clunky."

More Pico Corvil Analytics cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."

"The solution is free to use."

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

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

"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 cheap."

"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 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."

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

"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."

"It is pricey versus its competitors."

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

"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."

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

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

869,785 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Comms Service Provider

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Educational Organization

Financial Services Firm

52%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Real Estate/Law Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	7

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

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 38% of the time

Nagios Core vs Icinga

Compared 18% of the time

Checkmk vs Icinga

Compared 11% of the time

Nagios XI vs Icinga

Compared 5% of the time

Datadog vs Icinga

Compared 3% of the time

More Icinga Competitors

NETSCOUT nGeniusONE vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 22% of the time

ExtraHop Reveal(x) vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 17% of the time

NIKSUN NetVCR vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 15% of the time

Datadog vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 13% of the time

Alluvio AppResponse vs Pico Corvil Analytics

Compared 12% of the time

More Pico Corvil Analytics Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Icinga

October 2025

Download Icinga product report

Buyer's Guide

Pico Corvil Analytics

September 2025

Download Pico Corvil Analytics product report

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring

Corvil

Overview

Icinga is a robust tool for monitoring IT infrastructure, known for its distributed monitoring capabilities and seamless integration with multiple platforms. It efficiently observes servers, network devices, and environments like Linux and Windows, enabling proactive issue identification and resource management.

With a focus on task delegation and clustering, Icinga offers an intuitive interface through its GUI and Icinga Director, simplifying configuration. The extensive plugin library supports diverse technologies, while the API allows automation with tools like Terraform and Ansible. Despite its strengths, users report challenges with data display in the GUI, a need for improved dashboards, and complex configuration processes. Users benefit from its SNMP alerts, email notifications, and automated incident handling, making it essential for managed service environments and enterprises.

What are the key features of Icinga?

Task Delegation: Streamlines monitoring tasks across distributed systems.
Event Handler: Enables automatic service recovery with minimal intervention.
Plugin Library: Offers extensive support for integrating diverse technologies.
API Accessibility: Facilitates automation with popular tools like Terraform.
Custom Plugins: Allows easy creation and personalization for monitoring needs.

What benefits should you consider in Icinga reviews?

Flexibility: Tailors monitoring to specific requirements with community support.
Scalability: Successfully manages growing infrastructure demands.
Proactivity: Enhances issue identification and resource allocation.
Integration: Seamlessly works with existing IT operations platforms.

Icinga is widely adopted in IT environments for monitoring servers, networks, and applications across industries such as finance, healthcare, and technology. Its ability to integrate with various operating systems and automation platforms makes it a versatile choice for industries prioritizing comprehensive surveillance and proactive management of their infrastructure.

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

September 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: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,785 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.