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

Catchpoint vs Icinga comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 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

Catchpoint
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
56th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
31st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (37th), Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) (11th)
Icinga
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
27th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
26th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (12th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (31st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Catchpoint is 0.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Icinga is 1.3%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Icinga1.3%
Catchpoint0.6%
Other98.1%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

AnmolRai - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Consultant Project Lead at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Valuable monitoring features enhance ecommerce experience while improvement needed in region-specific insights
As part of the improvement, there are certain categories, like for the China market, where we face issues. We are currently using an external tool, Splunk, for reporting. If we could receive similar data for the China market as we do for North America and Asia Pacific, this would be helpful.
Harrison Bulley - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Catchpoint has a very professional service team, they can help you with the scripting and other functionalities, and they have a dedicated network team, so if you face any issues with the geolocations on the nodes or anything related to the network, there is dedicated support available 24 hours a day, seven days a week."
"The product's most valuable feature is the ability to identify and troubleshoot network issues."
"During business hours, it has worked absolutely fine without any issues."
"The most valuable features of Catchpoint are basically the transaction monitors on the API and UI."
"Catchpoint is very flexible and also provides logs for troubleshooting purposes. It helps us fix issues within the SLAs signed with the end users. The tool is easy to learn."
"The thing I like most is the tech support in this company, because they have 24/7 chat support. We can chat immediately and ask them about an issue and they keep responding. They create tickets on our behalf and respond."
"Catchpoint has everything you could want in a synthetic tool, and many things that you didn't know you wanted but you are ecstatic to have."
"Catchpoint's customer service and support are valuable."
"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."
"I use it for monitoring infrastructure and it was very good for that issue."
"If you have a small infrastructure or a small number of devices that you want to monitor, then I think it's a good solution."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"We monitor all, starting from UPS to international mail chains."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
 

Cons

"Documentation and online indexing are awful but have been improved recently."
"We would like the script creation feature of this solution to be improved, as it currently requires a complicated manual process to update the scripts."
"It would be great if Catchpoint could incorporate its alerting system instead of relying on separate tools like ServiceNow."
"There are essentially a lot of quotas. Nobody wants to sit and manually create monitors for someone who uses synthetic monitoring."
"Catchpoint can be improved by focusing solely on network monitoring."
"There are essentially a lot of quotas. Nobody wants to sit and manually create monitors for someone who uses synthetic monitoring."
"Currently, Catchpoint is migrating to a new user interface. My colleagues and I feel that the old user version was better, it was more user-friendly."
"if we need to do performance analysis, we have to click too many times. For example, if there is an issue that is caught by Catchpoint, we need to understand what the error is and at which step it failed, or which transaction that is impacted. To drill down, we have to click too many things to get the answer."
"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."
"Network Discovery capabilities would be extremely helpful."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"The user interface should be improved."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of licensing fees, I believe they were slightly higher."
"The solution's pricing is comparable to the last tool we were using."
"The price and licensing are very, very high. They have to come down on the pricing to match with the industry standard."
"The solution's pricing varies based on services and licensing models."
"The pricing is based on consumption and works on a point scale. For example, let's say I want to look at www.google.com, and I'm going to test it to see if it's there. It will bring back all this data that tells me how long it took to connect and how long it took to get the first byte. It will list all the resources on the page, showing that they all work and there are no broken links. It brings that data back. That test has an assigned point value depending on what you decide to extract from that test. If all I do is check to see whether it's available, it might be one point. I don't know the exact point values off-hand. This is just an example."
"The solution is free to use."
"It's an open-source solution."
"The product is inexpensive compared to other DBM products."
"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."
"The solution is cheap."
"We're using the free version of Icinga."
"Even though Icinga's financial cost is low, it is an expensive product regarding the resources required to maintain and operate it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Construction Company
10%
Retailer
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Educational Organization
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Catchpoint?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the cost was very cost-effective and affordable.
What needs improvement with Catchpoint?
Catchpoint can be improved as it has a complex setup and configuration, and dashboard customization and UX should be improved.
What is your primary use case for Catchpoint?
My main use case for Catchpoint is proactive monitoring of application performance, availability, and user experience. A quick specific example of how I use Catchpoint for monitoring application pe...
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...
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...
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...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Icinga Cloud Monitoring
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Puppet Labs, Audi, Spacex, Debian, Snapdeal, McGill, RIPE Network Coordination Centre
Find out what your peers are saying about Catchpoint vs. Icinga and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.