We performed a comparison between Checkmk and Nagios XI 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."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"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."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"The most useful aspect of this solution is the ability to customize it for the client agent."
"BPI: It allows defining peripherals to map business criticality for efficient monitoring, as required."
"Nagios is a custom API manager, and we can expose custom APIs for our integration. This is a great feature."
"I can monitor a software made in-house to software of bigger companies."
"It is an open-source platform with valuable features for performance and stability."
"Nagios XI is stable."
"The dashboard allows you to see what's going on in the overall system."
"It's great for monitoring IT services infrastructure."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"Nagios XI can improve its GUI for users with a new look."
"The product's stability could be even better."
"The interface could be more user-friendly."
"The scalability of Nagios XI is scalable. However, it is not easy to do."
"The PNP4Nagios plugin not working easily with XI is an issue for me, because some open source monitoring plugins do not work out of the box. But in the end, you learn to live with it."
"They need more documentation for the plugins."
"The technical support is variable - sometimes I get answers, but most of my tickets go unanswered."
"We'd like to see more integration capabilities."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmk is ranked 18th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 6 reviews while Nagios XI is ranked 9th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 54 reviews. Checkmk is rated 8.6, while Nagios XI is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Checkmk writes "A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios XI writes "Great for monitoring IT services infrastructure with nice tools and helpful notifications". Checkmk is most compared with Zabbix, Icinga, Netdata, Centreon and OpsRamp, whereas Nagios XI is most compared with Nagios Core, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wireshark and Icinga. See our Checkmk vs. Nagios XI 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.