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
28th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
31st
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
25th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (13th)
LogicMonitor
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
6th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
8th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
7th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (12th), Container Monitoring (4th), AIOps (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Icinga is 1.7%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LogicMonitor is 2.9%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LogicMonitor2.9%
Icinga1.7%
Other95.4%
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

"We monitor all, starting from UPS to international mail chains."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
"I use it for monitoring infrastructure and it was very good for that issue."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"There's a module called Icinga Director, which helps us configure the product using an intuitive interface through clicks instead of creating a text configuration. It's very helpful for us."
"Icinga2 was designed to delegate, distribute and balance tasks between several nodes."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"Another feature from the technical aspect, the back-end, is the ability to allow individual users or customers to have their own APIs. They're able to make changes using the plugins covered by LogicMonitor. That is a very powerful feature that is more attractive to our techno-savvy customers."
"LogicMonitor has positively impacted our organization by cutting down white noise and false positives, allowing our team to be more proactive than reactive, which cuts down on the SLOs and SLAs we are trying to meet at all times."
"We went from nothing to pretty much full visibility across our internal and external estates of equipment, which has been massive for us in terms of being able to resolve problems faster and provide better customer service to our customers."
"LogicMonitor helped reduce the length of an outage of a facility because of the identification of a fiber cut, so my company was able to be on top of that faster, so in that respect, the product gave us less than one year's worth of ROI."
"LogicMonitor has a very highly talented support team that can answer the questions and help the customer right away."
"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."
"Having a suite of modules that do all the work for you rather than having to set up loads of things yourself and it be there straight away ready to go is mind-blowing."
"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."
 

Cons

"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"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 tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"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."
"Icinga is a complex solution that's hard to learn. It's a powerful product for monitoring, but new users will have a hard time figuring out what to do."
"In general, the product does not look good. However, it does what it is supposed to do. So, the improvements should focus on usability and UI."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"If you only want to use LogicMonitor in the cloud, there's a better tool available."
"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."
"One of the areas that I sometimes find confusing is the way that the data is presented. For example, a couple of weeks back I was looking at bandwidth utilization. That's quite a difficult thing to present, but they should try to dumb down how the data is presented and simplify what they're presenting."
"LogicMonitor has a very steep learning curve."
"There are some very specific things that need improvement in LogicMonitor. One is the lack of formatting for customized alerts, particularly the delivery of them to our email channel."
"We only use plain monitoring and do not use cloud monitoring such as Office 365 because it is too expensive."
"The topology mapping is all based on the dynamic discovery of devices that could talk to each other. There is no real manual way that you can set up a join between two devices to say, "This is how this network is actually set up." For example, if you have a device, and you're only pinning that device and not getting any real intelligent information from it, then it can't appear on the map with other devices. Or if it can appear, then it won't show you which devices are actually joined to it."
"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."
 

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."
"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."
"The solution is cheap."
"This is an open-source solution with paid support."
"It's an open-source solution."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"The solution is free to use."
"It's an enterprise-grade solution and competitively priced compared to the other solutions that are out there... Our organization is not huge, but LogicMonitor is worth every penny that we pay for it. I've never heard anyone say, "I'm not sure that we're getting good value for money from this product." It's integral to our business."
"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."
"As a managed services provider, the licensing model that LogicMonitor provides us is excellent. We are able to scale up and scale down as needed. The pricing is reasonable for the amount of features and support that they provide."
"In terms of pricing, I would rate LogicMonitor four out of five."
"We are on an enterprise license plan, we are paying $7.75 per device a month. That is for a commitment of 350 devices. Anything that is over the 350 is charged at 1.2 times the rate; 1.2 times $7.75 would be the overage charge. We are looking at increasing our commitment to either 450 or 500 devices. It changes our pricing if we go to 450 devices, bringing it from $7.75 down to $7.70. If we go for 500 devices, it brings it from $7.75 down to $7.50. We will probably factor in the volume discount drop from $7.75 to $7.50 in our decision of whether we uplift or not. We also have some cloud monitors, which are about $500 a month."
"The features were very valuable to us because we could consolidate them into one platform and have a good user experience with the platform, our accounts, and the support team. That was the key driver for us. That was what we were looking for. We looked for a comprehensive solution that could provide advanced features all in one platform, and LogicMonitor was the solution that we chose. It definitely has a premium price. However, you are getting what you pay for in a very effective way. That was important in our decision-making.The features were very valuable to us because we could consolidate them into one platform and have a good user experience with the platform, our accounts, and the support team. That was the key driver for us. That was what we were looking for. We looked for a comprehensive solution that could provide advanced features all in one platform, and LogicMonitor was the solution that we chose. It definitely has a premium price. However, you are getting what you pay for in a very effective way. That was important in our decision-making."
"The tool's pricing falls into the middle range."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
890,027 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
8%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise12
 

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?
LogicMonitor has a very steep learning curve. The user interface sometimes can feel unintuitive. The mobile app has some limitations. The only challenges we have are sometimes the setup, which can ...
 

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.
890,027 professionals have used our research since 2012.