We performed a comparison between Checkmk and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"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."
"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."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"The product has helped our organization with in-depth monitoring."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"It's easy to use."
"Availability monitoring is the feature I have found most valuable, as well as the capacity and ability to send notifications."
"I enjoy its integration with the Microsoft Active Directory functions, which means users, computers, or other group policies can connect with Windows Active Directory."
"I like the historical reporting of observer metrics."
"We have found the scalability capabilities to be okay."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"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 initial setup is a bit complex."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"The price could be improved."
"Stability and some performance issues exist and they need improvement."
"System Center just provided upgrade and update features for Windows clients, and Windows systems, and did not support Linux, Android, or iOS, and other operating systems. They need to provide better integration with other operating systems if they don't already."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
"Application monitoring must be improved."
"The solution should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
"It could use some system enhancements, such as better dashboards."
"The interface is a little bit cumbersome and certain actions could be simplified."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmk is ranked 21st in Network Monitoring Software with 6 reviews while SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews. Checkmk is rated 8.6, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Checkmk writes "A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". Checkmk is most compared with Zabbix, Icinga, Netdata, Centreon and OpsRamp, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics. See our Checkmk vs. SCOM report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software 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.