We performed a comparison between Checkmk and ScienceLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"The most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it has a lot of different pieces, and they all work together...It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"Power packs."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"The best feature is the highly flexible graphs."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"If an alert is generated for a specific pattern in the log, and if Checkmk catches that log, it will stay there even after the alert is resolved."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"Sometimes we receive alerts, and it can become annoying when you acknowledge an alert. It is very clunky when you acknowledge the alert. The process is not very intuitive, and there are instances where it feels a bit cumbersome to acknowledge an alert."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"I would like to see out-of-the-box standard dashboards for common services."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"They should improve their support process and add chat."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"They need a little more self-service."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmk is ranked 18th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 6 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 42 reviews. Checkmk is rated 8.6, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Checkmk writes "A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". Checkmk is most compared with Zabbix, Icinga, Netdata, Centreon and Observium, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our Checkmk vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, best Network Monitoring Software vendors, and best Server Monitoring 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.