Centreon vs Checkmk comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Centreon and Checkmk are both solutions in the Network Monitoring Software category. Centreon is ranked #23 with an average rating of 7.7, while Checkmk is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.5. Centreon holds a 1.2% mindshare in NMS, compared to Checkmk’s 1.3% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of Centreon users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Checkmk users who would recommend it.

Centreon

Read 31 Centreon reviews

9,361 Views
7,395 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Checkmk

Read 9 Checkmk reviews

8,999 Views
6,839 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Centreon

Checkmk

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

Centreon and Checkmk are competitive solutions in the monitoring industry. Centreon takes the lead due to its notable scalability and customization capabilities.

Features: Centreon excels in scalability, integration ease, and plugin availability, providing a comprehensive monitoring platform. Users also value its maintenance scheduling and detailed reporting features. Meanwhile, Checkmk stands out with auto-discovery and rule-based configuration that ease the monitoring setup significantly. It also offers custom monitoring checks and efficient alerting systems.

Room for Improvement: Centreon needs to improve its downtime settings for multiple devices and enhance web app monitoring and cloud service integration. Improving configuration processes and mobile app capabilities is recommended. Checkmk can enhance alert management to avoid stale notifications and focus on creating a user-friendly interface. Adding agentless monitoring options is also suggested.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Centreon offers various deployment options, including on-premises and public cloud. While customer support is responsive, 24/7 availability and more service package flexibility are needed. Checkmk is praised for its quality customer support but faces initial deployment challenges due to frequent customization, impacting setup complexity for some users.

Pricing and ROI: Centreon offers competitive pricing reflecting its extensive features with open-source options. In contrast, Checkmk's affordability is appealing, especially for budget-conscious organizations. Both generate significant ROI through efficiency gains and cost reduction, with Centreon's features justifying its cost and Checkmk offering satisfactory performance for its price.

To learn more, read our detailed Centreon vs. Checkmk Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Centreon vs. Checkmk

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 915,325 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

Centreon

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

23rd

Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring

26th

Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software

20th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Checkmk

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

17th

Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring

27th

Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software

23rd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Server Monitoring (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Centreon is 1.2%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Checkmk is 1.3%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Checkmk	1.3%
Centreon	1.2%
Other	97.5%

Network Monitoring Software

Featured Reviews

Sulesh PK

Monitoring and Operations Pilot at Egis S.A.

Experience enhanced monitoring with real-time alerts and efficient support

I would like to see automation in the poller features, as currently, the poller is not automated. If we could automate the addition or removal of hosts in the poller, it would improve efficiency. Sometimes, Centreon does not show the status of services as updated, which should be addressed. Additionally, enhancements are needed in identifying configuration issues, providing real-time alerts in case of issues, and improving the HTTP configuration tasks, as Centreon does not currently display issues with HTTP links, requiring manual investigation.

Read full review

reviewer1704309

IT Administrator at a construction company with 201-500 employees

Utilizing data monitoring capabilities and scripting potential to optimize system management

I frequently program functions with PowerShell, and although Bash could be used, my specialization is in PowerShell. Two of us focus on programming in PowerShell for infrastructure optimization. I set up a dedicated server to run scripts every hour, generating files for Checkmk output. However, Checkmk does not allow running scripts at varying intervals. I am working on this in the raw version of Checkmk.

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

"Centreon's real-time monitoring, despite having some manual aspects, supports us in managing our operations effectively."

"I find the product's scalability to be one of the most valuable features since it allows us to add unlimited devices for monitoring and to set up additional polling servers without additional license cost or downtime in our monitoring."

"The most valuable feature is the monitoring of servers and networks, because we have a lot of them and need to maintain control."

"Centreon enables us to proactively take action on issues before they even become incidents, which significantly reduces business disruptions resulting from controllable factors."

"It provides visibility into the network."

"The customizable reports and dashboards are really flexible. We started this partnership with Centreon, when we were looking for a solution, because of the flexibility of the reporting. That's what we found to be most attractive in the solution. You can display the data as you want."

"We picked Centreon because, after an open-source comparison, and given what we want to do, and our skills and experience as well, it was the best solution for us, the most reliable for our services."

"The dashboards are valuable because they ease troubleshooting and viewing. It becomes easier to locate the source of a problem... The dashboards make it easier to communicate with our clients. They don't want to see the alert console, they want to see a beautiful dashboard representing their network and their business and to watch it in case something is wrong in their environment."

More Centreon pros

"The most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."

"I really like the auto-discovery feature."

"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."

"The alerting system in Checkmk really works properly."

"Overall, from one to ten, I rate Checkmk a nine."

"Checkmk helps me compare data and foresee issues."

"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."

"Checkmk was built on a platform that was user-friendly, and I could build my charts easily."

More Checkmk pros

Cons

"The pricing setup costs and licensing weren't very good in the past."

"The most important issue is the capability to interconnect with other systems. It already exists for some of them. For example, the Stream Connector is something we use to populate data in another system. This kind of facility for connecting should exist for all products that it makes sense to have connected to a monitoring solution."

"Currently, we have to go through all of the different templates and take a look at how the template is configured, and how specific parameters may change across different templates with different precedents, megatons, etc. It's a lot of work and involves trial and error. I wish they could simplify the process."

"Centreon is very bad with auto-scanning. It's very monolithic software. It doesn't have microservices and it only has basic clustering. You cannot, for example, have six or seven nodes for Centreon's cloud processes."

"To get it started is a lot of work, since it comes empty. We had to push information into it to make it work."

"Centreon introduced network discovery in the most recent update. However, it doesn't work well. Our previous monitoring tool could discover networking equipment on the network and identify the relationships between the devices."

"I would like them to improve their documentation. When I faced some issues, I was looking for more documentation on the Internet. There is official documentation on Centreon's website, which sometimes is useful. Sometimes it is not very useful, as you cannot find the information or enough examples of configuration. The answer for me was to contact the support, who helped me, but I was not able to find all the information by myself on Centreon's website. A Centreon community or blog would be helpful."

"Release management and quality of testing need improvement, because with each major upgrade we have many issues coming in. Then, it takes several minor upgrades to get rid of them."

More Centreon cons

"The initial setup is a bit complex."

"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."

"If an alert is generated for a specific pattern in the log, and if Checkmk catches that log, it will stay there even after the alert is resolved."

"Sometimes we receive alerts, and it can become annoying when you acknowledge an alert. It is very clunky when you acknowledge the alert. The process is not very intuitive, and there are instances where it feels a bit cumbersome to acknowledge an alert."

"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."

"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."

"Checkmk does not allow running scripts at varying intervals."

"Checkmk does not work too easily with the PowerStore. I use a PowerShell script as Checkmk runs on Linux and a Windows system, connecting with the Checkmk agent."

More Checkmk cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would like to see improvement in the licensing model. You can purchase X number of licenses, up to 1,000 devices or 1,000 instances. Your next batch is 2,000. But what if you only need, say, 1,200? The model could be changed a little bit."

"For more complex tasks, we use prepaid support days and ask Centreon to come onsite."

"The solution is very effective, despite the low price."

"The tool is cheaply priced."

"If you need basic monitoring without dashboards, just monitoring, the plugins are very useful and really cheap. If you want a more complete solution with dashboards and reporting, the EMS solution is great and it is not that much more expensive. It's a good value. Really good."

"You purchase a package. You have a support contract (there is also a platinum support contract) and it is per module. That means you have to pay, e.g., for the MBI module or the BAM module. Or, if you want to save a lot of money, you can pay for IMP, which is the complete package."

"Centreon is always available to develop new plugins when needed. The most important thing is that their maintenance account yearly subscription fee includes the fact that they will maintain the new plugins that you requested them to deliver."

"The pricing starts at around 5000 euro. However, this depends on: Your environment, the size of your host, how many hosts you have, how many remote pollers you have, and if you want to use the Monitoring Business Intelligence or Centreon MAP functionalities."

More Centreon pricing and cost advice

"The price of Checkmk is cheaper compared to other enterprise products."

"The product is affordable."

"Checkmk is a fairly reasonably priced solution."

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

915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Construction Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Computer Software Company

Outsourcing Company

Comms Service Provider

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	14

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	2

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Centreon?

Centreon's pricing is not very expensive. Initially, I rated it seven, but corrected to five out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Centreon?

I have certain concerns with Centreon, such as being unable to set downtime for multiple devices at once due to the limitation of adding only 50 devices in a single go. Increasing this limit would ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Centreon?

We are using Centreon for monitoring devices, both LAN and WAN devices. There are subsidiaries for my company, so if any devices go down or there are any service alerts, we receive alerts through C...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Checkmk?

I will get more information about Checkmk when the proof of concept is done. It's going to be before the summer. There will be a report about the tool and a recommendation to use it. So far, it loo...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Checkmk?

Checkmk ( /products/checkmk-reviews ) is a monitoring tool, so that's what I will use it for. Right now, it's not in production, but it's in a proof of concept phase. It looks good, so probably, du...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Checkmk?

I would rate Checkmk an eight out of ten, not knowing the final report.

See all answers

Comparisons

Zabbix vs Centreon

Compared 9% of the time

PRTG Network Monitor vs Centreon

Compared 7% of the time

Datadog vs Centreon

Compared 6% of the time

SolarWinds NPM vs Centreon

Compared 6% of the time

EV Observe vs Centreon

Compared 2% of the time

More Centreon Competitors

Zabbix vs Checkmk

Compared 8% of the time

Icinga vs Checkmk

Compared 5% of the time

PRTG Network Monitor vs Checkmk

Compared 4% of the time

LibreNMS vs Checkmk

Compared 4% of the time

SolarWinds NPM vs Checkmk

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmk Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Centreon

October 2026

Download Centreon product report

Buyer's Guide

Checkmk

October 2026

Download Checkmk product report

Overview

Centreon offers a robust IT infrastructure monitoring platform, featuring user-friendly dashboards and real-time monitoring. It excels in scalability and integration, making it suitable for monitoring diverse network environments.

Centreon stands out with its unified monitoring capabilities, providing businesses with user-friendly dashboards and extensive plugins for customization. Its scalability ensures companies can expand monitoring tasks without incurring additional costs. Integration capabilities allow seamless interaction with ticketing systems and automation tools. Centreon offers customizable reporting and effectively manages downtimes, providing real-time feedback and proactive maintenance through Business Activity and Anomaly Detection features. Despite its strengths, users find areas for improvement including downtime scheduling, API functionalities, UI enhancements, end-to-end monitoring, and documentation. Businesses are increasingly demanding better automation, network discovery, cloud monitoring, and notification options.

What are Centreon's standout features?

Unified Monitoring: Delivers a comprehensive monitoring platform for IT infrastructure.
User-Friendly Dashboards: Offers intuitive and customizable dashboards for efficient monitoring.
Extensive Plugins: Enables flexibility and customization through numerous plugins.
Scalability: Allows expansion of monitoring duties without additional costs.
Integration Capabilities: Seamlessly integrates with ticketing systems and other tools.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Cost Efficiency: Minimized resolution time through proactive maintenance features.
Ease of Use: Simplifies monitoring with its user-friendly interface.
Proactive Issue Resolution: Real-time monitoring and alerts help prevent service outages.
Customizable Reporting: Adapts reports to meet specific organizational requirements.
Diverse Network Management: Capable of handling diverse IT environments efficiently.

Centreon is implemented across industries to monitor IT infrastructures, including networks, servers, and applications. Companies leverage it to track server performance, manage network devices, and receive timely alerts on device status. Its ability to integrate with ticketing systems and automation tools streamlines operations, enhancing global IT infrastructure monitoring and customer service management with real-time feedback and issue resolution.

Centreon

Checkmk provides a comprehensive monitoring solution designed to streamline IT infrastructure management with features like auto-discovery, custom checks, and effective alerting.

Checkmk serves as a powerful tool for organizations managing large networks of servers, databases, and network appliances across multiple locations. It simplifies monitoring tasks with features like auto-discovery, custom scripting, and Slack integration. Users benefit from its resource monitoring capabilities and scalability, although there are areas for improvement, such as alert acknowledgment and greater usability. It supports both Linux and Windows environments, enabling effective oversight of IT infrastructure. The growing body of documentation enhances its adaptability in complex settings.

What are the key features of Checkmk?

Auto-Discovery: Identifies new hosts and applies monitoring rules automatically.
Custom Monitoring Checks: Tailor checks for databases and specific applications.
Slack Integration: Receive downtime alerts directly in Slack channels.
Automation for Scripts: Streamline repetitive tasks with scripts.
Effective Alerting System: Offers timely notifications on network activities.

What benefits can users expect?

Resource Efficiency: Saves time on configuration with automated features.
Scalability: Easily adapts to growing network and system requirements.
Cost-Effectiveness: Suitable option for budget-conscious users.
User-Friendly Setup: Easy to configure, reducing the learning curve.

Industries deploying Checkmk frequently utilize it for monitoring IT infrastructure, including servers and network appliances, to manage proactive issue identification and compliance. Companies employ it in the proof of concept phase or for ongoing monitoring, covering hosts, services, and custom application metrics.

Checkmk

Sample Customers

Airbus, Bollore, BT, Canal Plus, Kuehne Nagel, Limagrain, LVMH, Oberthur Technologies, Orange, Darty, Addax Petroleum, Plastic Omnium, Auchan, Valeo, Saint Gobin, Clarins, Hugo Boss, JC Decaux, French Government (Defense, Justice, Environment, Agriculture), OptiComm, Thales, Zeiss.

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Centreon vs. Checkmk

September 2026

Free Report: Centreon vs. Checkmk

Find out what your peers are saying about Centreon vs. Checkmk and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Centreon vs. Checkmk report.

See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Cloud 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.