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

Checkmk vs ManageEngine OpManager 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

Checkmk
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
17th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (10th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (24th), Cloud Monitoring Software (20th)
ManageEngine OpManager
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.3
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Checkmk is 1.4%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ManageEngine OpManager is 1.5%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ManageEngine OpManager1.5%
Checkmk1.4%
Other97.1%
Network Monitoring Software
 

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.
LA
Technical Solution Specialist at Crypto-gen
Has helped centrally manage users and assets while making operational tasks more efficient
The main drawback is there is less documentation available, both public documentation and partner-available documentation. The learning materials are very limited, and there is also a limitation of support SLA. It takes a huge amount of time to resolve certain issues when ManageEngine OpManager technical support gets involved. The expertise of support is limited. Reporting could be improved with more details. The content and richness can be improved on the reports. To make ManageEngine OpManager a better product, the first priority is improving the after-sales support and learning materials for local engineers and partners to enhance their capacities and expertise. The second priority is improving the product itself, including dashboards and reporting enrichment. Lastly, new feature adoption such as DLP or endpoint monitoring should be considered. Features that should be offered include DLP, Privileged User Access, data classification, and MDR. These are features that can be groomed around the MMS if properly configured.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"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."
"The alerting system in Checkmk really works properly."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"Checkmk helps me compare data and foresee issues."
"The most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."
"Overall, from one to ten, I rate Checkmk a nine."
"The setup was easy."
"We don't have to keep an eye on it; it has a good automation option, which keeps us informed. It gives very less false positives. Overall, a really great product."
"The solution is scalable."
"The solution's network device monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring alerts, as the administrators are immediately notified and can do the required action immediately, and this is the feature we value and use the most."
"We run weekly and monthly reports to provide exceptions, and it's helped our organization remediate problems proactively."
"You can put all of your work on there, they'll send you an email or send you a text. That functionality as a network engineer is the one I like the most. I do like the fact that we can schedule reports. That works too because that's a lot fewer spreadsheets that I have to create."
"The dashboard, versatility and larger horizon are valuable."
 

Cons

"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"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."
"Checkmk does not allow running scripts at varying intervals."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"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 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."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"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."
"There should be an option to get mobile notifications or SMS mirror notifications for critical issues. That way, when we don't have access to email, we can still receive notifications via our phones."
"For the implementation part, I am facing issues when configuring the business view; when I create the business view, I experience problems with the port interface and get confused about which interface is connected to which endpoint."
"The initial setup is a bit complicated. It needs a technician who is very aware of the flow and how to officially set up the flow chart, etc."
"We would like the solution's customize and build functionality to be more user-friendly."
"With regard to configurations, however, it would be nice to have more documentation on SNMP configurations. For example, if I want to add a new vendor, it would be great if ManageEngine provided the requirements for that vendor, such as the commands needed."
"The solution's reports need to include the number of applications consumed."
"I would like to see more capabilities and specific profiles built for the manufacturing sector."
"You cannot resolve 100 percent of the issues yourself. You would need to reach out to the support. It needs to be cheaper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Checkmk is a fairly reasonably priced solution."
"The price of Checkmk is cheaper compared to other enterprise products."
"The product is affordable."
"ManageEngine OpManager has a three-tier licensing model."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis and the pricing is on the cheaper side."
"The solution is highly affordable"
"It is not really expensive; it is nominal licensing."
"The licensing costs depend on the number of devices and accounts that are being monitored by the solution."
"The solution's pricing is very low compared to other products."
"It is reasonably priced."
"We had perpetual licenses. The cost was around 36,000 for OPManager, and then you'd have the yearly maintenance fee of 2,000 or 3,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

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 Business17
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise27
 

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 experience regarding pricing and costs for ManageEngine OpManager?
Based on my experience and use case, the setup cost and price of ManageEngine OpManager is good. However, if it were available in both on-premises and cloud versions, it would be more reliable for ...
What needs improvement with ManageEngine OpManager?
ManageEngine OpManager could improve by adding network device control capabilities. The control feature would be more helpful for our operations. Currently, there is no feature for controlling inte...
What is your primary use case for ManageEngine OpManager?
I am using ManageEngine OpManager for network and server reliability. We have multiple locations, so integrating all location devices in ManageEngine OpManager into one single console allows us to ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
OpManager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Bonita, Thorp Reed & Armstrong, Galaxy, Fiserv Credit Union Division, Universitas 21 Global, ERP Suites LLC
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmk vs. ManageEngine OpManager and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.