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

HPE OneView vs Icinga comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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

HPE OneView
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
84
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Icinga
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
47th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (38th), Server Monitoring (16th), Cloud Monitoring Software (34th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of HPE OneView is 1.1%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 1.5%, down from 4.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
HPE OneView1.1%
Icinga1.5%
Other97.4%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

Kapil Pandey - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Management Consultant at National Institute for Smart Government - NISG
Gaining seamless monitoring and customization capabilities
One of the best features of HPE OneView is that you get a complete architecture with a single click. The analytics and monitoring tools in HPE OneView are superior to other network monitoring platforms such as Nagios. The features include multiple modules that allow you to create and write your own scripts based on your requirements for different servers such as database servers or tapping roaming servers. There is more feasibility when using HP Service Manager because, unlike other tools with predefined standards for script writing, we have the option for customization as per our choice, and dashboard reports can be customized.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are very glad, happy with it."
"OneView is a nice choice: It is visually appealing, easy to use, easy for managing servers going forward, and easy for building servers at a profile level, versus going in traditionally and configuring all that stuff, because it can automate all that stuff."
"They give great service, and it's a great product, at a good price."
"​It is very stable. We have had no downtime nor issues in approximately a year. ​"
"Scalability is perfect; if I need to, I can add another couple blades or I can add more to it, and I still have about half my 3PAR nodes open so I can keep adding storage as I need it."
"In 3.0, HPE has done a better job with firmware updates, added more features, and also enabled the possibility to stage updates on the iLO card."
"The automation allows a complete implementation of a server with an operating system from start to finish by providing playbooks using the Rest API, and codes, from Ansible and using them towards the solution."
"The most valuable features are the composable structure, infrastructure, and automation."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"I use it for monitoring infrastructure and it was very good for that issue."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"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."
"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."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
"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."
 

Cons

"The possibility to do more analytics regarding the status of the assets."
"Integration could be improved. Sometimes OneView doesn't identify physical hardware."
"Stability is a hit and miss."
"If I remember correctly, our CTO was saying that he wants to see a little bit more of integration into the HPE StoreVirtual VSA product."
"The solution's console can be improved by making it more user-friendly and adding the capability to filter the reports out using only the information required."
"It's a nice product. It's a little slow sometimes."
"I'd like to see more integration across Hypervisor and 3PAR storage and other storage products."
"I would like to see support for things that aren't in the current generation. We have a lot of 7th and 8th generation hardware."
"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."
"It needs Trap SNMP. I saw the documentation for Zabbix, that it has its own built-in product which handles SNMP traps, and there's nothing similar in Icinga or Nagios. I think this feature is most important for me."
"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 solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"The connection between Icinga and Icinga Web."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"HPE could lower the price."
"HPE had some other solutions, but they were actually quite expensive to buy. So, when OneView came along, it was kind of reasonable in terms of price for licenses, etc."
"I feel the product's price falls a bit on the higher side."
"​I am happy with the price."
"This license cost for OneView was $3,000 USD."
"I would rate the cost as six out of ten."
"I think that the price of OneView is $500 USD per server, which is a little high."
"When it comes to the government, money is never an issue, so it was excellent in terms of the HPE OneView licensing cost. Hitachi was cheaper, but I'd rate HPE OneView cost-wise as eight out of ten."
"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"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."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
"It's an open-source solution."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The solution is free to use."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
899,645 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Educational Organization
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise51
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with HPE OneView?
From the dashboard and reporting perspective, HPE OneView could be improved by having multiple modules rather than just a single customization option.
What is your primary use case for HPE OneView?
The typical use case for HPE OneView addresses a shift from manual monitoring, where clients needed to log in to the server every hour. After integrating everything on HP Service Manager and HP Ope...
What advice do you have for others considering HPE OneView?
Regarding the integration capabilities of HPE OneView with platforms such as VMware, SAP, or other platforms, I work for Telecom VAS servers, for SMSC, CMC, and CRB. We already have an HP team in p...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

HP OneView
Icinga Cloud Monitoring
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Asante, ITS Nordics, Columbus Communications, Mansfield Oil
Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE OneView vs. Icinga and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
899,645 professionals have used our research since 2012.