No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Azure Monitor vs Checkmk comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 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

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (8th)
Checkmk
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
17th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (15th), Server Monitoring (10th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (27th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Cloud Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 2.6%, down from 6.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Checkmk is 2.9%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Monitor2.6%
Checkmk2.9%
Other94.5%
Cloud Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Andy Rabern - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Telemetry insights have improved how I track user behavior and application performance daily
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it does well. My perspective is more based on an Application Insights agent running on a service or an app service and sending the telemetry via the agent, and also doing the filtering of telemetry at the agent level so you are not having a ton of telemetry. I believe Azure Monitor does pretty much the same thing. I have also used tools such as New Relic, and New Relic is a much more robust tool, but that is a different product and you are going to pay for that. It is a different offering altogether. The subscription that we had at the time allowed for a couple gigabytes of telemetry during the month, and I believe that telemetry only lives for about two months. You have to experiment with it to see how much you want to pay. I was not really involved in the pricing. It was more along the lines of we were running up against our limits in terms of the amount of free telemetry or telemetry that we get with our subscription, and so we either needed to scale back or turn specific telemetry types off or do some more sampling. It is nice that those capabilities are there so that you can reduce the amount of telemetry. I cannot really speak to pricing but I do believe that it is somewhat reasonable for Azure Monitor. New Relic is pretty expensive, I believe.
reviewer1704309 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Administrator at a construction company with 201-500 employees
Utilizing data monitoring capabilities and scripting potential to optimize system management
I frequently program functions with PowerShell, and although Bash could be used, my specialization is in PowerShell. Two of us focus on programming in PowerShell for infrastructure optimization. I set up a dedicated server to run scripts every hour, generating files for Checkmk output. However, Checkmk does not allow running scripts at varying intervals. I am working on this in the raw version of Checkmk.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Recently, they have improved their integration with other resources, so we get even more robust data."
"We get good results from Microsoft Azure, so that's why we stick with Microsoft Azure."
"Data exporting is easy, and this tool works seamlessly with other solutions. It's a stable and low-priced solution."
"One of the most useful aspects of this solution is the out-of-the-box functionality on all areas, especially on Application Insights, zero instrumentation, and artificial intelligence for event correlation."
"We are an operation center so we use this solution mainly to monitor all of our clients' environments and to help them with technical issues."
"It's a Microsoft native tool, so it works well with other Microsoft technologies, which is predominantly what our customer end-user base is."
"One of the advantages of Azure Monitor is that it is easier for us to use because we're mainly a Microsoft shop."
"It is a robust, stable product."
"The alerting system in Checkmk really works properly."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"Overall, from one to ten, I rate Checkmk a nine."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"The most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"Checkmk was built on a platform that was user-friendly, and I could build my charts easily."
 

Cons

"The price could be lower but it is not a must."
"If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill."
"The query builder could be better. In comparison to other monitoring tools, in order to use Azure Monitor, your engineers need to have KQL experience. If they don't, it's not intuitive as a system."
"I'd like the solution to do more around vulnerability assessment."
"When something goes down, we want the option to have automation in place to get it back up again as quickly as possible."
"The solution should have cross-connection or cross-communication between tech partners."
"I will rate Azure Monitor a seven out of ten, because this solution has two things that we don't like, e.g. it doesn't tell you what and how it happened."
"They should include advanced logging on the database level in the Azure pool."
"The main challenge for us is that we're moving from Nagios to Checkmk, and we're still getting used to the new way of working."
"Checkmk does not work too easily with the PowerStore. I use a PowerShell script as Checkmk runs on Linux and a Windows system, connecting with the Checkmk agent."
"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."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive, but it is worth the price."
"It is a pay-as-you-go model. I find it very cost-effective."
"The cost of Azure Monitor application performance should be less expensive."
"There is a monthly fee for the alerts triggered and the data stored."
"It's a costly solution"
"Azure Monitor is a competitively priced solution."
"Customers of Azure Monitor must pay an amount that depends largely on how many services they need to integrate and the storage space required in terms of logs, etc. If they only have a few small services to monitor, the price won't be too high, but on the opposite side of the spectrum, it can certainly get pricey."
"The licensing is a monthly fee."
"Checkmk is a fairly reasonably priced solution."
"The product is affordable."
"The price of Checkmk is cheaper compared to other enterprise products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it...
What is your primary use case for Azure Monitor?
I am a developer who uses Azure Monitor for telemetry of the applications that I work on. Application Insights is one of those tools, and I have also used other non-Azure products before. Currently...
What needs improvement with Checkmk?
I will get more information about Checkmk when the proof of concept is done. It's going to be before the summer. There will be a report about the tool and a recommendation to use it. So far, it loo...
What is your primary use case for Checkmk?
Checkmk ( /products/checkmk-reviews ) is a monitoring tool, so that's what I will use it for. Right now, it's not in production, but it's in a proof of concept phase. It looks good, so probably, du...
What advice do you have for others considering Checkmk?
I would rate Checkmk an eight out of ten, not knowing the final report.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. Checkmk and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.