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

Icinga vs LogicMonitor 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

Icinga
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
27th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
31st
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
26th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (12th)
LogicMonitor
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
6th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
8th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (12th), Container Monitoring (4th), AIOps (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Icinga is 1.6%, down from 4.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.8%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LogicMonitor2.8%
Icinga1.6%
Other95.6%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

Harrison Bulley - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Anshuman Thakur - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is one that not many are even aware of, as Icinga has a self-healing event handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted, and you can configure the handler to take action after the critical alarm without human interaction."
"Icinga2 was designed to delegate, distribute and balance tasks between several nodes."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
"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."
"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"People should know that it is simple and advanced."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by especially improving service reliability and user experience, and the dynamic alerting and root cause analysis have helped us fix issues before they cause a full-blown outage or degrade performance for end users."
"LogicMonitor gives us visibility into issues that we didn't even know existed."
"It’s more than just having a tool; it's something we can use day in, day out, giving us good insights to what is happening."
"We have had a fantastic experience so far; it is a fantastic product, it is definitely worth looking at, and it has definitely delivered on our requirements."
"We have definitely seen ROI with LogicMonitor."
"The solution’s overall reporting capabilities are pretty powerful compared to ones that I have used previously. It seems like it has a lot of customizations that you can put in, but some of the out-of-the-box reports are useful too, like user logon duration and website latency. Those type of things have been helpful and don't require a lot of, if any, changes to get useful content out of them. They have also been pretty easy to implement and use."
"It's the depth of data that it gathers that I find really useful because there's nothing worse, when you're trying to find information about something or dig deeper into something, than hitting the bottom of the information really quickly and not having enough information to work with. With LogicMonitor, there is a load of information to dig through. It's a really good solution for that."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by reducing downtime and increasing uptime, allowing us to detect issues before they cause outages, maintaining business application uptime, preventing revenue loss, enhancing customer experience, expediting issue resolution, and reducing stress on the team."
 

Cons

"It is not really adequate for our current needs. It causes additional issues which we have to work around and takes us time that a better solution would not."
"Scalability is problematic. If you have a stable environment it's good, but if the environment is growing, I had some problems with Icinga."
"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."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."
"The user interface should be improved."
"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."
"Sometimes, it is very hard to keep an overview of what's happening."
"One thing I would like to see is parent/child relationships and the ability to build a "suppression parent/child.""
"It needs better access for customizing and adding monitoring from the repository. That would be helpful. It seems like you have to search through the forums to figure out what specific pieces you need to get in for specific monitoring, if it's a nonstandard piece of equipment or process. You have to hunt and find certain elements to get them in place. If they could make it a bit easier rather having to find the right six-digit code to put in so it implements, that would be helpful."
"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."
"LogicMonitor should always improve AI because we are always striving for real intelligence."
"Dashboarding capabilities could be enhanced. It is cumbersome, you must do it all at once, and then you must repeat the process every now and then."
"We would like to see more functionality around mapping of topologies, in terms of networks. An improvement that we would like to see is added functionality to get more detail out of mapping. For example, if the LogicMonitor Collector identifies a connection between two network endpoints, it would be great to actually see which ports are connecting the two endpoints together. That functionality is something we greatly desire. It would actually make our documentation more dynamic in the sense that we wouldn't need to manually document. If this is something that the platform could provide, then this would be a great asset."
"Automated remediation of issues has room for improvement. I don't know how best to handle it, but I know that they're kind of working on it. I know there are some resources that can do automated remediation. I would like them to improve this area so it could be completely hands-free, where it detects an issue, such as, if a CPU is running high. There are ways to do it even now, but it's a bit more involved."
"I wish LogicMonitor could improve by integrating all dashboards for different countries and regions within one view to simplify oversight, as navigating multiple sites takes time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The solution is free to use."
"The solution is cheap."
"It's an open-source solution."
"The tool's pricing falls into the middle range."
"We have definitely seen ROI with LogicMonitor. We used to provide 24/7 IT support for our users. We have since been able to change to operating just within normal business hours for IT support, and LogicMonitor was a large part of being able to accomplish that."
"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.""
"I know we are saving at least several hundred thousand dollars in that we're not buying Cisco Prime."
"The solution is not expensive."
"It's affordable. The price we get per license is a lot cheaper than what we were getting with some of the other tools. There are other monitoring tools out there that are cheaper, but what you get with LogicMonitor, out-of-the-box, makes it worth the cost."
"In terms of pricing, I would rate LogicMonitor four out of five."
"It is pretty expensive, but we now need one less full-time engineer. With on-prem, we used to have one more engineer in our department. That engineer has now moved to another department. Our capacity is better with this product than the previous one. It is easy for us to manage the sites. You have to choose between the standard account and the premium account. With the premium account, you get a lot more than the standard one, and you can also buy some extra features. It is a good thing to look at them because you would probably want to buy them. You should take your time and negotiate the price. They are easy. Like all cloud providers, they are able to discuss the price and if necessary, change the price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
894,668 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise18
 

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...
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...
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...
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogicMonitor?
I researched the pricing of LogicMonitor, and it costs around ten dollars per device per month, which is somewhat expensive compared to other products. Some monitoring tools such as Zabbix are free...
What needs improvement with LogicMonitor?
There are several areas for LogicMonitor to improve. Overly sensitive real-time monitoring leads to too many alerts, which could be managed via AI to reduce false positives. Cost optimization by of...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Icinga Cloud Monitoring
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Kayak, Zendesk, Ted Baker, Trulia, Sophos, iVision, TekLinks, Siemens
Find out what your peers are saying about Icinga vs. LogicMonitor and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,668 professionals have used our research since 2012.