Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Nagios XI vs Pandora FMS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 6, 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

Nagios XI
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
13th
Ranking in Server Monitoring
8th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
14th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Pandora FMS
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
46th
Ranking in Server Monitoring
16th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
42nd
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
28th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (44th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Nagios XI is 3.3%, down from 4.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pandora FMS is 0.4%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Amir  Said - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective alerting enhances network monitoring experience with an easy setup
We love Nagios XI due to the fact that JPS Web is very useful. JPS monitors the modem and performs switching, monitoring the computer, and performing switching. We implement some applications and traffic monitoring. The alerting system is very effective. For instance, if we have an alarm on some RAM storage if the traffic is cut or dropped.
Gabriel Glusgold - PeerSpot reviewer
Personalized metrics; simplicity of data
My primary use case for Pandora is monitoring This solution has helped us improve our organization by allowing us to create a lot of metrics on several platforms, including Windows, Linux, and Unix. We then use these Pandora metrics to create an interface. We then pass the interface off to the…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The features I've found the most useful are the plug-ins, the fact that you can connect almost everything to it. That's very useful."
"We love Nagios XI due to the fact that JPS Web is very useful."
"Though I downplayed the administrative NCC GUI, this is by far the strongest aspect of the Nagios XI product."
"It's great for monitoring IT services infrastructure."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"The ability to set up templates and groups of checks, as well as customize the checks themselves."
"It is an open-source platform with valuable features for performance and stability."
"The Script Module in Nagios is really easy to use and is really cost efficient."
"It is easy to create your own custom modules if you just know a little bit of scripting. If you have unique requirements, you can just make your own modules. You can even grab checks from other vendors. There are open-source checks for various things such as SMTP, etc. There is a long list of different ones from Nagios. You can just use them, and within seconds, you get yourself a check that is monitoring whatever you need. It is really flexible. I guess that's why they call it Pandora Flexible Monitoring System (FMS). It is reliable. It does the job, and it alerts. It is also surprisingly feature-rich. Our network guy just recently asked about a particular protocol to monitor the bandwidth on the network, which is not a common protocol. When I looked it up, and I found that they cover it. It is very mature for a not-so-known product."
"The administration of the console is very easy. I like that Pandora FMS is interactive and easy to manage."
"The monitoring system within this solution is very good. It is easy to use and navigate, and makes issue alarms easily viewable."
"We are able to control our business with this all-in-one monitoring tool."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"It allows me to quickly see the status of all of my printers, switches, computers, and virtual machines to determine if any system has fallen."
 

Cons

"I would like a much easier GUI so that I can delete events and logs, which will free up a lot of space."
"Open-source software is usually not user-friendly."
"I would like to see more customization in the network map because it is a bit tricky to use it."
"The GUI could be improved."
"I would like to see support for notification via SMS."
"Improve the documentation, examples, and best practices, therefore users can understand how to do things."
"There's room for improvement in the visibility, and in the ability to extract information. Stuff like this should be more simple."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a bit too basic, and maybe having a GraphQL interface would resolve this."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"I would like for the solution to be faster and have a better tolerance between parallel servers for Pandora and Pest Control."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"Pandora FMS is relatively new, and the interface with the older version crashes at times. We have several different operating systems, such as Linux and Windows, and Pandora does not run as well in these."
"This solution requires proper training to get 100% out of it."
"I think some improvements to the Android app would be good."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"The product lacks APIs for integration with other systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For our country in North Africa, it's expensive and we could purchase another solution for that price. But it's a reasonable price if we're speaking in international terms."
"As it is not an agentless tool, I think it is expensive."
"The licensing fees for this solution are approximately $3,000 USD per year."
"We are using the free version of this solution."
"For the cost of the commercial product and support, and taking into account the open source characteristics of it, I believe it is difficult to a better value."
"The pricing is really cost efficient. The licensing is perpetual and can be renewed very easily."
"Nagios XI is an expensive solution."
"This solution is very expensive, at approximately $5,000 USD when I purchased it, which is why I haven't upgraded my version in several years."
"You have to pay for the number of agents and models that you are monitoring. I would rate the cost at three with one being the most expensive and five being the cheapest."
"My rule of thumb would be that if you need more than thirty agents, and you lack an automation tool such as Chef or Puppet, you will save a lot of time and money going to the Enterprise edition."
"In terms of money, the Enterprise version is the cheapest that I have found after a market study."
"The open-source version offers 100% functionality and the hardware requirements for a solution like this one are very modest."
"You get the license and it includes updates, new versions, and access to the complete library of modules."
"The Open Source Community Edition is great to just explore the software, or use it on medium-sized infrastructures."
"They are very competitive on the pricing side. That's one reason why my manager keeps using it."
"Only one payment and it includes support, updates, new versions, and access to the complete library of plugins except for SAP and z/OS."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user174738 - PeerSpot reviewer
May 31, 2015
Nagios vs. Zabbix vs. PRTG vs. Spiceworks vs. Solarwinds Network Performance Monitor
I have researched a quite a few network monitoring tools which can be used for various monitoring purposes of not only the servers, but the intermediate routers as well. There are majorly three types of these softwares. Ones which are completely open-source, you can do almost anything you want…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
62%
Computer Software Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
5%
Manufacturing Company
4%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Educational Organization
8%
Media Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Nagios XI?
It is an open-source platform with valuable features for performance and stability.
What needs improvement with Nagios XI?
The GUI could be improved. It's a bit too basic, and maybe having a GraphQL interface would resolve this. Also, there is room for improvement in the interface.
What do you like most about Pandora FMS?
Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data.
What needs improvement with Pandora FMS?
I would like for the solution to be faster and have a better tolerance between parallel servers for Pandora and Pest Control. In the next release, I'd like to see, when it comes to monitoring, the ...
What is your primary use case for Pandora FMS?
My primary use case for Pandora is monitoring.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nagios has over one million users globally, including AOL, DHL, McAfee, MCI, MTV, Yahoo!, Universal, Toshiba, Sony, Siemens, and JPMorgan Chase.
Rakuten, Prosegur, Repsol, Teléfonica, Allianz, Ottawa Hospital, Hughes
Find out what your peers are saying about Nagios XI vs. Pandora FMS and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.