Icinga vs LogicMonitor comparison

Icinga and LogicMonitor are both solutions in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category. Icinga is ranked #30 with an average rating of 7.0, while LogicMonitor is ranked #15 with an average rating of 7.7. Icinga holds a 2.4% mindshare in IM, compared to LogicMonitor’s 2.0% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Icinga users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of LogicMonitor users who would recommend it.

Icinga

Read 17 Icinga reviews

4,206 Views
3,281 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

LogicMonitor

Read 33 LogicMonitor reviews

4,975 Views
2,736 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Icinga

LogicMonitor

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Icinga and LogicMonitor are competing network monitoring solutions. LogicMonitor has the upper hand with its comprehensive feature set despite a higher price point.

Features: Icinga offers extensive flexibility and integration possibilities, catering to businesses needing tailored solutions. It provides a customizable framework and supports various monitoring protocols. LogicMonitor delivers advanced monitoring capabilities, out-of-the-box functionality, and predictive analytics, supporting enterprises desiring robust, ready-to-use features.

Room for Improvement: Icinga could enhance its ease of use, user interface design, and community support resources. LogicMonitor might improve by offering more competitive pricing, reducing complexity in configurations, and providing more flexible deployment options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Icinga supports a scalable on-premise deployment model, ideal for organizations with specific customization needs but relies on community support. LogicMonitor offers cloud-based deployment for quick installations and superior support options, simplifying the deployment and maintenance process.

Pricing and ROI: Icinga's open-source nature implies a lower initial cost, ideal for organizations with development resources. However, there can be additional costs for custom development and maintenance. LogicMonitor, while more expensive, offers enhanced ROI due to its comprehensive feature set and efficient monitoring capabilities, which can justify the investment for enterprises requiring extensive functionality.

To learn more, read our detailed Icinga vs. LogicMonitor Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Icinga vs. LogicMonitor

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,114 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

25th

Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring

30th

Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software

23rd

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Server Monitoring (13th)

LogicMonitor

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

12th

Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring

15th

Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software

14th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (22nd), Container Monitoring (6th), AIOps (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Icinga is 2.4%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.0%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

IT Infrastructure Monitoring Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
LogicMonitor	2.0%
Icinga	2.4%
Other	95.6%

IT Infrastructure Monitoring

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

Anshuman Thakur

Site Reliability Engineer at a comms service provider with 501-1,000 employees

Monitoring has reduced downtime and now enables proactive alerts across cloud workloads

When it comes to the improvement of LogicMonitor, I think there are a few points that can be improved. The first one is alert tuning, which takes time. It requires effort when trying to understand it for the first time. The defaults do not always match our workload patterns, so I have to adjust the thresholds to reduce noise and avoid alert fatigue. While the dashboards are solid, I sometimes wish that the UI was a bit more intuitive when drilling down quickly during an incident. There are many options and finding the exact view where I can identify the exact problem takes a few extra clicks. When an alert comes and I click on a LogicMonitor alert, it takes time to understand what the alert actually is and to go through the data points. The alert page specifically could be better. The alert tuning part can also be made more simple. The first area that could be better is alert clarity and routing. Sometimes alerts do not include enough immediate context, so I still have to spend a few minutes correlating data across views. Adding more actionable details directly in the alert would make the response even faster. LogicMonitor sometimes gives false alerts as well. For example, if an EC2 instance is down, it will not determine whether the EC2 instance has been deliberately turned off or if it is actually not responding. At that time, it will give false alerts. The clearing of alerts is also an issue. Once an issue is fixed, the alert should be cleared, but it takes a little time for that alert to be cleared. Another improvement that would be helpful is simpler customization for complex dashboards. It is powerful, but building highly tailored dashboards, especially across multiple environments, can feel heavy and time-consuming. I would also appreciate a stronger out-of-the-box AWS correlation, such as automatically grouping related issues across EC2, EBS, and ALBs in a way that reads as a single incident story. This would reduce the mental overhead during outages. Grouping incidents together, such as all the EC2 alerts, all the EBS alerts, or all the load balancer alerts would be beneficial. Overall, none of these are blockers, just some improving areas. There could be smarter anomaly detection out of the box that can catch unusual but important behavior without manual tuning of every threshold. Better tagging and dynamic grouping for EC2 instances would also be helpful. Cleaner alert de-duplication so a single underlying issue does not generate multiple redundant alerts would improve the system. More guided root cause workflows would be beneficial, such as providing the most likely causes based on correlated metrics. Faster search navigation across devices, dashboards, and alerts during incidents would also improve the platform.

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."

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

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

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

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

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

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

"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

"LogicMonitor has actually helped reduce our downtimes, helping us reduce downtime to about 40 to 50% by warning us before servers get heavy on usage or CPU load so we can take action in advance."

"One thing that's very valuable for us is the technical knowledge of the people who work with LogicMonitor. We looked at several products before we decided to use LogicMonitor, and one of the key decision-making points was the knowledge of the things that they put in the product. It provides real intelligence regarding the numbers that you see on the product, which makes it easy for us technical people to troubleshoot. Other products don't provide you with such information. You see a value going up, but you don't know what it means. LogicMonitor provides such information. For instance, if a value goes up, it says that it is probably because your disk area was too low."

"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by allowing us to implement it for 1,200 clients or 1,200 endpoints within three months, which went very well."

"The initial setup is very simple."

"Whenever we reach out to our customers, we give LogicMonitor as a dashboard to them so they don't need to monitor the hardware side separately. For example, if my service is running on their hardware X, that means they don't need to monitor hardware X and our services too. LogicMonitor has the capability of monitoring their hardware as well as our services. This is how LogicMonitor helps us."

"LogicMonitor helps us prevent potential downtime. It's pretty good. It generates low-level warnings that aren't necessarily preemptive but can still alert us to issues we should investigate. These warnings allow us to correlate data and identify areas where we should take action, even if the issues aren't critical."

"We get full visibility into whatever the customer wants us to monitor and we get it pretty rapidly. That is very important. Only having certain metrics that other platforms will give you out-of-the-box means you only get a small picture, a thumbnail picture. Whereas with LogicMonitor, you get the entire "eight by 10 picture", out-of-the-box. Rather than some availability metrics, you get everything. You get metrics on temperature, anything related to hardware failure, or up and down status."

"We have very fine-tuned alerting that lets us know when there are issues by identifying where exactly that issue is, so we can troubleshoot and resolve them quickly. This is hopefully before the customer even notices. Then, it gives us some insight into potential issues coming down the road through our environmental health dashboards."

More LogicMonitor pros

Cons

"The installation and configuration are very complex."

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

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

"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."

More Icinga cons

"I'd like to see more automation in the tool, especially around remediation."

"While dynamic alerting is great, the overall alerting system can be complex to configure."

"LogicMonitor should improve its logging features. It can become expensive and should be cost-effective. It would be great to see prebuilt templates for alerting methods in LogicMonitor that are similar to the prebuilt dashboards. Currently, users have to build their alerting configurations."

"Their Logs feature is quite new. It is not as feature-rich as we would like it to be. There have been a couple of conversations internally around other log management tools, like Splunk, which may do more for us than LM Logs. The benefit of LogicMonitor is that our staff know how to use it, so we don't really want to move away from it, if we don't have to. I fully expect there to be more development in this area. It is their newest feature, so it is understandable that it hasn't evolved as some of the other stuff. It would be good to see a bit more development in this area, but I think the monitoring side of things is spot on."

"The ease of use with data source tuning could be improved. That can get hairy quickly. When I reach out for help, it's usually around a data source or event source configuration. That can get challenging."

"The dashboards can be improved. They are good, but there is a pain point. To show things to management, to explain pain points to other customers, to show them exactly where we can do better, the dashboarding could be better. Dashboards need to show the key things. Nobody is going to go into the ample details of Excel sheets or HTML."

"Sometimes alerts do not include enough immediate context, so I still have to spend a few minutes correlating data across views."

"The container monitoring seems to be really behind compared to some bespoke cloud-native monitoring solutions that are designed around Kubernetes, containers, and ephemeral environments."

More LogicMonitor cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"The solution is cheap."

"The solution is free to use."

"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."

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

"It's an open-source solution."

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

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

"The licensing side of things with LogicMonitor, is quite simple. It is one license per device. Recently, you have additional licenses with things, like LM Cloud, which does confuse things a bit. Because it's very hard to estimate how many licenses you're going to need until you're monitoring it, so it's quite hard through that process to give a customer price to say, "This is how much this services will cost.""

"It can handle scaling. It is like any other cloud service. There is a cost associated with scaling, so we currently don't monitor all of our environments. We monitor just the customer-facing production environments. It would be nice if we could monitor our dominant environments, but we will have to pay a lot more due to the scaling issue. So, there's a balance there between what we would like and what we are willing to pay for."

"They are expensive for the cloud."

"The solution is not expensive."

"It definitely pays for itself in the amount of time we're not spending with false errors or things that we haven't quite dealt with monitoring. It has been good cost-wise."

"We've had customers who have reduced their costs by not having multiple platforms for monitoring. That said, especially with super-large environments, the cost model for LogicMonitor is the one area where we run into issues."

"The tool's pricing falls into the middle range."

"I know we are saving at least several hundred thousand dollars in that we're not buying Cisco Prime."

More LogicMonitor pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

14%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Healthcare Company

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	12
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	11

Questions from the Community

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

What is your primary use case for Icinga?

We use Icinga as a monitoring solution to monitor customers' infrastructures. We work as a managed service provider, so we offer monitoring and many other services to our customers. So we use it in...

See all answers

What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?

It actually depends on the exact purpose or requirements. Some tools are better for only network devices while others are better from a cloud monitoring or APM monitoring perspective. You can check...

See all answers

What do you like most about LogicMonitor?

LogicMonitor helps us prevent potential downtime. It's pretty good. It generates low-level warnings that aren't necessarily preemptive but can still alert us to issues we should investigate. These ...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogicMonitor?

I did not have much experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for LogicMonitor. I sat in on some of the business meetings, but my main focus was the technical side of it, getting every...

See all answers

Comparisons

Zabbix vs Icinga

Compared 27% of the time

Nagios Core vs Icinga

Compared 12% of the time

Checkmk vs Icinga

Compared 8% of the time

Nagios XI vs Icinga

Compared 5% of the time

SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor vs Icinga

Compared 4% of the time

More Icinga Competitors

SolarWinds NPM vs LogicMonitor

Compared 5% of the time

ScienceLogic vs LogicMonitor

Compared 4% of the time

Datadog vs LogicMonitor

Compared 4% of the time

OpsRamp vs LogicMonitor

Compared 4% of the time

SCOM vs LogicMonitor

Compared 3% of the time

More LogicMonitor Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Icinga

January 2026

Download Icinga product report

Buyer's Guide

LogicMonitor

January 2026

Download LogicMonitor product report

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring

No data available

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

LogicMonitor offers flexible IT monitoring with customizable dashboards and robust alerting capabilities. It integrates seamlessly with third-party apps like ServiceNow and provides a single-pane view for diverse IT environments, aiding in proactive issue resolution and enhancing operational efficiency.

LogicMonitor stands out with its capability to monitor diverse infrastructures including Cisco Voice systems, data centers, and virtual environments. Supporting servers, storage, networking devices, and applications, it provides seamless integration with cloud services like AWS and Azure. Users leverage its scalability and flexibility, benefiting from dynamic thresholds, anomaly detection, and detailed visualization. All these features contribute to improved management of IT assets and streamlined operations. Users suggest improvements in mapping, reporting, and automation for remediation, desiring more customizations and an expansive application performance monitoring toolset.

What are LogicMonitor's key features?

Customizable Dashboards: Allows personalization of monitoring views.
Robust Alerting: Offers advanced alert configurations.
API and Plugin Support: Ensures integration with apps like ServiceNow.
Dynamic Thresholds: Facilitates proactive issue resolution.
Anomaly Detection: Aids in identifying potential issues early.

What ROI should users look for in reviews?

Operational Efficiency: Enhanced by detailed visualizations and dashboards.
Scalability: Supports growing IT environments effortlessly.
Proactive Management: Facilitated by flexible alerting and monitoring.
Flexibility: Customization in monitoring diverse environments.

LogicMonitor is widely implemented across industries, providing monitoring for infrastructure in sectors like telecommunications, cloud computing, and managed services. Managed service providers particularly value its ability to track client environments, deliver proactive alerts, and generate comprehensive reports, while its integration with cloud platforms like AWS and Azure offers users centralized management and visibility into IT assets worldwide.

LogicMonitor

Sample Customers

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

Kayak, Zendesk, Ted Baker, Trulia, Sophos, iVision, TekLinks, Siemens

Buyer's Guide

Icinga vs. LogicMonitor

January 2026

Free Report: Icinga vs. LogicMonitor

Find out what your peers are saying about Icinga vs. LogicMonitor and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Icinga vs. LogicMonitor report.

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

We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.