CA Unified Communications Monitor vs Icinga comparison

Broadcom and Icinga are both solutions in the Network Monitoring Software category. Broadcom is ranked #88, while Icinga is ranked #25 with an average rating of 7.0. Broadcom holds a 0.5% mindshare in NMS, compared to Icinga’s 1.8% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 85% of Icinga users who would recommend it.

CA Unified Communications M...

Read 2 CA Unified Communications Monitor reviews

799 Views
575 Comparison Views

50% willing to recommend

Icinga

Read 17 Icinga reviews

4,206 Views
3,491 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

CA Unified Communications M...

Icinga

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

CA Unified Communications Monitor and Icinga are network monitoring and performance management products. CA Unified Communications Monitor seems to have the upper hand in providing better support and reliability, whereas Icinga's flexibility and open-source model make it appealing for customizable solutions.

Features: CA Unified Communications Monitor provides advanced analytics, real-time monitoring, and detailed performance insights to optimize network performance. Icinga offers customizable alerts, extensive integration options, and a scalable architecture, which make it flexible for various applications.

Room for Improvement: CA Unified Communications Monitor could improve in offering more affordable pricing options and expanding integration capabilities. Icinga might enhance ease of deployment, user interface complexity, and documentation clarity to improve user experience.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: CA Unified Communications Monitor is known for straightforward deployment and strong customer support, ideal for organizations seeking hassle-free setup. Icinga's more complex deployment is supported by an active community, offering valuable resources for troubleshooting.

Pricing and ROI: CA Unified Communications Monitor has a higher initial setup cost but offers higher ROI with its comprehensive capabilities and reliability. Icinga's lower initial cost suits budget-conscious organizations, though customization and maintenance expenses might offset its affordability.

To learn more, read our detailed CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Icinga Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Icinga

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 peers since 2012

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

CA Unified Communications M...

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

88th

Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring

69th

Average Rating

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Unified Communications Monitoring (3rd)

Icinga

Ranking in Network Monitoring Software

25th

Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring

30th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Server Monitoring (13th), Cloud Monitoring Software (23rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of CA Unified Communications Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 1.8%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Icinga	1.8%
CA Unified Communications Monitor	0.5%
Other	97.7%

Network Monitoring Software

Featured Reviews

itarchit489981

IT Architect at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees

Good end-to-end voice quality monitoring and offers valuable features

The solution should have automatic baseline detection. On the per hour, per base, per week. That's usually the best. And on a per individual CI level. I know that they're working on it and when that's available then we will definitely implement it because it will reduce the effort we need to maintain all the products. Right now we have to set thresholds for every location, and it needs to be actually dynamic so if we have better thresholding, we'll have faster alarms across all our locations. We won't have to expend effort on it by resetting or checking them on a regular basis.

Read full review

Harrison Bulley

Senior Infrastructure Engineer at Net Consulting

A stable, scalable and cost-effective solution that helps with inbuilt scripts for easy modification

I think the software is quite good, but we have had problems with getting it to recognize certain areas and amend certain checks, where we needed so we would have to create backend scripts for those checks. Though, being open source, it has the support to create backend scripts, it would be better to have these scripts in-built.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We use the solution to meet the needs of the customer."

"Good end-to-end monitoring"

"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."

"I like the ability to amend and adjust things really easily, which is useful in a case where you could make it auto-discover and then set a template to say all of these applications or servers under this template have an automatic threshold set that you’d set up manually."

"The ability to customize scripts and build your own queries to request information from the infrastructure elements you want to monitor. This level of personalization and customization is highly appreciated."

"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."

"The best thing about the solution is how it highlights errors, the issues, and what needs my attention. The solution directs me to areas that I should look for first."

"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."

"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."

"Icinga has multiple automation and integration features. There is an API for everything and a web UI for configurations. The APIs enable you to automate tasks in Icinga. We can also use plugins to talk to the API. The Icinga Director talks to a database in the background, and you can import settings from the CMDB to all systems in Icinga."

More Icinga pros

Cons

"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved."

"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."

"It needs Trap SNMP. I saw the documentation for Zabbix, that it has its own built-in product which handles SNMP traps, and there's nothing similar in Icinga or Nagios. I think this feature is most important for me."

"I think the software is quite good, but we have had problems with getting it to recognize certain areas and amend certain checks, where we needed so we would have to create backend scripts for those checks. Though, being open source, it has the support to create backend scripts, it would be better to have these scripts in-built."

"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."

"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."

"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."

"Icinga is a complex solution that's hard to learn. It's a powerful product for monitoring, but new users will have a hard time figuring out what to do."

"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."

"In general, the product does not look good. However, it does what it is supposed to do. So, the improvements should focus on usability and UI."

More Icinga cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"We're using the free version of Icinga."

"The solution is free to use."

"It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low."

"This is an open-source solution with paid support."

"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."

"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."

"It's an open-source solution."

"The solution is cheap."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Educational Organization

14%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	7

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Icinga?

It is cost-effective, and the return on investment can be very interesting because the price is low. If you want to include this product in the services you offer to your customers, the return on i...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Icinga?

There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved. For instance, multi-tenancy for monitoring the virtual infrastructur...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Icinga?

We use Icinga as a monitoring solution to monitor customers' infrastructures. We work as a managed service provider, so we offer monitoring and many other services to our customers. So we use it in...

See all answers

Comparisons

StackState vs CA Unified Communications Monitor

Compared 11% of the time

LogicMonitor vs CA Unified Communications Monitor

Compared 10% of the time

Zabbix vs CA Unified Communications Monitor

Compared 9% of the time

ITRS Geneos vs CA Unified Communications Monitor

Compared 9% of the time

Prognosis Platform vs CA Unified Communications Monitor

Compared 9% of the time

More CA Unified Communications Monitor Competitors

Zabbix vs Icinga

Compared 27% of the time

Nagios Core vs Icinga

Compared 12% of the time

Checkmk vs Icinga

Compared 8% of the time

Nagios XI vs Icinga

Compared 5% of the time

Flowmon vs Icinga

Compared 2% of the time

More Icinga Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Ixia Hawkeye

December 2025

CA Unified Communications Monitor report

Download CA Unified Communications Monitor product report

Buyer's Guide

Icinga

January 2026

Download Icinga product report

Also Known As

CA UC Monitor

Icinga Cloud Monitoring

Overview

CA Unified Communications Monitor is a unified communications monitoring solution that evaluates and reports on the network’s support of real-time applications in multi-vendor environments, so that Network Administrators can optimize the network’s quality of service and end user experience.

Broadcom

Icinga is a robust tool for monitoring IT infrastructure, known for its distributed monitoring capabilities and seamless integration with multiple platforms. It efficiently observes servers, network devices, and environments like Linux and Windows, enabling proactive issue identification and resource management.

With a focus on task delegation and clustering, Icinga offers an intuitive interface through its GUI and Icinga Director, simplifying configuration. The extensive plugin library supports diverse technologies, while the API allows automation with tools like Terraform and Ansible. Despite its strengths, users report challenges with data display in the GUI, a need for improved dashboards, and complex configuration processes. Users benefit from its SNMP alerts, email notifications, and automated incident handling, making it essential for managed service environments and enterprises.

What are the key features of Icinga?

Task Delegation: Streamlines monitoring tasks across distributed systems.
Event Handler: Enables automatic service recovery with minimal intervention.
Plugin Library: Offers extensive support for integrating diverse technologies.
API Accessibility: Facilitates automation with popular tools like Terraform.
Custom Plugins: Allows easy creation and personalization for monitoring needs.

What benefits should you consider in Icinga reviews?

Flexibility: Tailors monitoring to specific requirements with community support.
Scalability: Successfully manages growing infrastructure demands.
Proactivity: Enhances issue identification and resource allocation.
Integration: Seamlessly works with existing IT operations platforms.

Icinga is widely adopted in IT environments for monitoring servers, networks, and applications across industries such as finance, healthcare, and technology. Its ability to integrate with various operating systems and automation platforms makes it a versatile choice for industries prioritizing comprehensive surveillance and proactive management of their infrastructure.

Icinga

Sample Customers

BBVA Compass

Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre

Buyer's Guide

CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Icinga

December 2025

Free Report: CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Icinga

Find out what your peers are saying about CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Icinga and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Icinga report.

See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.

We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.