We performed a comparison between Checkmk and Nagios Core based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it has a lot of different pieces, and they all work together...It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"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."
"What I like about Nagios Core is that it helps me ensure everything is running smoothly by checking the status of hosts and services."
"I like the way the solution sends alerts and how it keeps on escalating them."
"We use the product to monitor server applications."
"Nagios Core is very configurable. Whatever you want, you can do it."
"Our customers like that Nagios Core is an open source solution. It can be customized to our customers' specific needs."
"Key features include the GUI interface, its notification capabilities, and the real-time reporting."
"The most valuable feature of Nagios Core is it allows us to develop and add as many plugins as we want."
"Provides timely notifications."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"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."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"Would benefit from aggregations if a particular server goes down."
"Nagios Core is limited in terms of distributed setups, and there is no central view for remote data centers."
"Cloud monitoring is an area for improvement because there aren't too many plugins available."
"The dashboard and monitoring features could be improved."
"Making it a little easier to configure and set up from the start would help. There are multiple layers that you have to wade through to be able to set it up, to do it the right way, and to get it to do what you want it to do."
"The mapping is a little hard."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
"The tool needs to improve the integrations."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmk is ranked 21st in Network Monitoring Software with 6 reviews while Nagios Core is ranked 7th in Network Monitoring Software with 46 reviews. Checkmk is rated 8.6, while Nagios Core is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Checkmk writes "A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios Core writes "An Open Source Fully Featured Data Centre Monitoring Tool". Checkmk is most compared with Zabbix, Icinga, Netdata, Centreon and Observium, whereas Nagios Core is most compared with Nagios XI, Zabbix, Icinga, Centreon and OP5 Monitor. See our Checkmk vs. Nagios Core report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.