We performed a comparison between Nagios XI and Splunk APM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in IT Infrastructure Monitoring."The Script Module in Nagios is really easy to use and is really cost efficient."
"It's great for monitoring IT services infrastructure."
"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."
"It is an open-source platform with valuable features for performance and stability."
"The most valuable feature is its support for different types of devices, where it can use all of the equipment that you need."
"I can monitor a phone on a desk to very big servers of any company."
"Nagios is a custom API manager, and we can expose custom APIs for our integration. This is a great feature."
"You want to monitor a specific metric that nobody else has? You can do it even with the most basic of scripting skills, and you can always share it with the vast community of Nagios Exchange."
"This solution is very quick to deploy as it is a SaaS solution and integrates with tools like ServiceNow."
"It is a good tool. It allows you to set alerts for application and infrastructure monitoring, and it allows you to create dashboards."
"Detectors are a powerful feature."
"The solution's service map feature allows us to have a holistic overview and to see quickly where the issues are."
"Splunk's dashboards are great."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"I like the fact that Splunk APM makes it easy to connect to the application database and run queries against the data."
"The most valuable features are troubleshooting and optimizing application performance."
"The scalability of Nagios XI is scalable. However, it is not easy to do."
"The Configuration Wizard needs improvement, because not all vendors are present."
"The product's stability could be even better."
"The product does not have SAP monitoring."
"The reporting part should be made simpler. While we can obtain all the reports we need, we always have to create work-arounds to get them."
"The product uses the backend as Perl and could be modified to a more lightweight solution like what's being offered by other vendors."
"Improve the documentation, examples, and best practices, therefore users can understand how to do things."
"Technical support is an area that needs improvement. It is not available 24/7."
"The cardinality is pretty low."
"Splunk APM's performance could be improved - at the moment, it's very slow and takes forever to give me what I want."
"Splunk APM should include a better correlation between resources and infrastructure monitoring."
"I've been using the Splunk query language, and it can be a bit time-consuming to set up the queries I need."
"The licensing model is expensive. We need to monitor the amount of data ingested because the cost is based on the data collected."
"The UI enhancements could be a way to improve the solution in the future."
"The monitoring of workloads when using SignalFx could be improved."
"The UI enhancements could be a way to improve the solution in the future."
Nagios XI is ranked 9th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 54 reviews while Splunk APM is ranked 13th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 13 reviews. Nagios XI is rated 8.2, while Splunk APM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Nagios XI writes "Great for monitoring IT services infrastructure with nice tools and helpful notifications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Splunk APM writes "Provides great visibility, analysis, and data telemetry". Nagios XI is most compared with Nagios Core, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wireshark and Icinga, whereas Splunk APM is most compared with Splunk ITSI (IT Service Intelligence), Sentry, Monte Carlo, Elastic Observability and Observe.
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.