Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Checkmk vs DX Unified Infrastructure Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 6, 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

Checkmk
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
14th
Ranking in Server Monitoring
11th
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
26th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
19th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
DX Unified Infrastructure M...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
70th
Ranking in Server Monitoring
23rd
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
49th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
42nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
120
Ranking in other categories
AIOps (25th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Checkmk is 3.1%, up from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of DX Unified Infrastructure Management is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmk3.1%
DX Unified Infrastructure Management1.1%
Other95.8%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

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.
ON
Solution Architect at SA Consulting
Helps us provide visibility into network performance, capacity planning, and cost analysis
Better support and more accessible resources are crucial. Customers have expressed that support is not as flexible, and it is difficult to obtain necessary information quickly. Customers would benefit from improved training material for integration with other products. The solution's pricing is high and needs to be reconsidered, and the technical support should improve to provide more accessible and open information.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"The alerting system in Checkmk really works properly."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"Checkmk was built on a platform that was user-friendly, and I could build my charts easily."
"Overall, from one to ten, I rate Checkmk a nine."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"Checkmk helps me compare data and foresee issues."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"Monitors the infrastructure asset and also monitors as an IT service."
"What I like about DX Unified Infrastructure Management is that it's a very good product. The feature I found most valuable in the solution is the MCS feature, which is the automatic deployment of the objects you want to monitor. You can set up a system, for example, if it's a Windows machine and I want to test specific devices on it, I could do that through DX Unified Infrastructure Management. That type of deployment is very good because it means you won't miss any monitoring aspect on any server."
"MultiWAN and Balance service"
"The benefit is easy installation. Thus, the model approach of the product and out-of-the-box probes, which deliver direct value."
"I would recommend DX Unified Infrastructure Management to others as it is a good and reliable solution."
"It is the foundation for our monitoring solution."
"It gives us visibility inside applications. It helps us to dig down and find the root cause of any issue within the network."
"The monitoring of the applications to let our business know when things are performing and that they're up and available."
 

Cons

"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"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."
"Checkmk does not allow running scripts at varying intervals."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"Currently lacks a mobile application which would be helpful."
"The company has not kept pace with developments."
"It needs a little bit more functionality in the Admin Console."
"I'd also like to see more probes. More probes in the sense that we were coming across devices that we're expected to monitor and manage for which, out of the box, there isn't a nice, clean solution. There are probes that are dedicated for certain devices and certain device types, which is great. But then there are times we come across nuanced products that we have to develop our own solution for. There are probes that exist in there that allow us to make a customized solution, but it takes a lot more time."
"We've had issues with pulling reports."
"We had to do some work to make what was more of a business class solution work at an enterprise level."
"How we can get more native information from CA's solutions."
"There is also room for improvement in the reporting. It is not really good enough, according to our customers. So what we now usually do is use Power BI to get them the kinds of reports they want."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Checkmk is a fairly reasonably priced solution."
"The product is affordable."
"The price of Checkmk is cheaper compared to other enterprise products."
"Pricing for DX Unified Infrastructure Management isn't cheap at all. It's a complex tool, so you have to pay more. No one is happy with a large bill to pay, but if it's a complex product and you designed a complex solution to be monitored, it'll be your fault that you need to buy an expensive product, and that would be implicit in the design of DX Unified Infrastructure Management. Monitoring is just a small part of it. Sometimes you have to pay a significant amount of money for a complex yet very good solution."
"This product is expensive compared to other vendors (SolarWinds, ManageEngine)."
"CAD $400,000 annually."
"The license cost depends on the number of probes and robots."
"The product-price ratio is better than other brands such as Fortinet or SonicWall."
"Reasonable setup cost and licensing prices."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Performing Arts
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Media Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise80
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What is your primary use case for DX Infrastructure Manager?
We are an integrating company that offers DX Unified Infrastructure Management to customers. We help them set it up, do the integration, and provide support. Our end customers include financial ins...
What advice do you have for others considering DX Infrastructure Manager?
I would recommend DX Unified Infrastructure Management to others as it is a good and reliable solution. I would rate it nine out of ten due to its robust functionality and capability to support inf...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for DX Infrastructure Manager?
The pricing of DX Unified Infrastructure Management is high and often a concern for customers. The cost is higher compared to other Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), which is feedback we hav...
 

Also Known As

No data available
DX Infrastructure Manager, DX Infrastructure Manager for Z Systems and CA UIM for zSystems, CA UIM (DX Infrastructure Manager), CA Nimsoft Monitor, CA UIM, DX Infrastructure Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
CBNCloud, IIJ Global Singapore, AT&S, AXSOS, Aozora Bank, HCL Technologies, IntelliNet, Securex
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmk vs. DX Unified Infrastructure Management and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.