Avoiding Cost Traps in Cloud Monitoring

Martin Hirschvogel
Checkmk

Choosing the right approach is critical with cloud monitoring in hybrid environments. Otherwise, you may drive up costs with features you don’t need and risk diminishing the visibility of your on-premises IT.

The complexity of IT infrastructures is constantly growing as organizations continue to combine cloud-based services with on-premises or edge IT infrastructure and adopt Kubernetes or serverless computing services. To ensure that their hybrid IT infrastructure performs optimally, ITOps teams need a monitoring solution that is capable of providing comprehensive visibility while easing their burden.

Different Monitoring Requirements

To avoid blind spots and budget bloat, there are two main questions ITOps needs to consider:

What applications and resources do we run in which part of the infrastructure?

And what monitoring requirements result from this?

This is especially important when considering cloud monitoring solutions. While they provide numerous functions for monitoring applications and computing resources residing in the cloud, they have limitations when it comes to monitoring on-premises environments. So, by operating all their business-critical IT assets locally and "only" virtual machines in the cloud, organizations would risk driving up expenses and impacting IT operations by implementing cloud monitoring.

NonTransparent Pricing Models

Even if an organization is running mission-critical workloads in the cloud, choosing a cloud monitoring solution can quickly result in costs that are unexpected, but ultimately avoidable. This is due to cloud monitoring providers' sometimes opaque billing models that impose a kind of penalty tax on the benefits of the cloud, such as flexibility and scalability. When you add subscriptions for additional features to the high base fee for the software, the initial cost quickly becomes unmanageable.

A virtual server in a popular configuration costs about $100 per month from a hyperscaler. Basic monitoring for such a host typically starts at $15 to $30 from cloud monitoring providers, and the cost can be many times higher depending on the desired feature set and sizing. Even simple monitoring of the operating system can quickly add up to at least 30 percent of the hosting bill.

Expensive Host-Based Billing

Host-based billing may seem simple at first glance. Yet the question arises as to whether host-based billing makes sense at all in a serverless world with managed services, etc., where hosts no longer play a major role.

Also, in a serverless world with managed services from cloud providers, it is difficult to quantify hosts. In the end, this will inevitably lead to the gradual introduction of secondary pricing metrics and, from the user's perspective, to costs that are difficult to predict and a lack of price transparency.

The conceptual problems of host-based pricing are particularly evident in the fact that many monitoring providers have introduced limits and additional price dimensions. For example, in some cases only a certain number of containers per host are included in cloud monitoring. However, this limit is usually quickly exceeded and additional fees apply for each additional container.

Artificial Limits and Custom Metrics

Custom metrics, which allow special data to be included in monitoring, can also quickly drive up costs. This is especially the case if custom metrics are essential for monitoring and you can only obtain useful monitoring by adding them. Artificial currencies or units in monitoring, such as those used to retrieve custom metrics, logs, or user-defined events, and which have complex conversion formulas, also do not necessarily provide a transparent view of costs.

Monitoring costs also vary depending on the cloud provider. For example, with a hyperscaler, all of the API calls that are required to monitor the cloud services cost money. With another provider, the API calls may be free, but you may run into rate limits. These are all cost factors that should be taken into account from the outset when choosing a monitoring solution.

Evaluating a cloud monitoring solution also includes ensuring that the solution supports all of the necessary features and services. Essential features, such as an SSO solution based on the SAML standard, should not be reserved for the higher-tier product and the associated more expensive plan levels.

Wrong Incentives and Exclusive Access

The pricing model of a good monitoring solution should also not create incentives to compromise on infrastructure architecture for cost reasons. For example, if an organization has to pay per monitoring instance, there is a strong temptation to save costs by minimizing the number of instances. However, there is a risk that the monitoring will not scale with the company's infrastructure — negating a key benefit of the cloud.

The goal of IT monitoring is to provide critical insight into IT infrastructure health and performance. Access to monitoring is critical for various teams to gain important insights for their daily work and to ensure smooth IT operations. However, charging on a per-user basis for monitoring could result in this information being made available only to an exclusive group to keep costs down. As a result, responsible individuals and teams would be denied visibility into the IT assets that are important to them, and the monitoring would be of no value to them.

Avoiding Cost Traps

A look at the market shows that the pricing of many monitoring vendors can quickly blow the monitoring budget due to hidden costs or subsequent price drivers — or even encourage the creation of poor IT architectures. If you are not careful, you can quickly end up paying 30 percent of your computing costs for monitoring. For comparison, common benchmarks suggest that ITOps should spend no more than 3 to 15 percent of its IT budget on observability, depending on the industry and the size of the organization.

Organizations should develop clear strategies and understand which business areas are running and will run on which parts of their IT architecture. Only by understanding your cloud and on-premises monitoring needs can you find a tailored solution with a precise and predictable pricing model, rather than paying a lot of money for an oversized solution that may not fit your infrastructure.

Martin Hirschvogel is Chief Product Officer at Checkmk

Related Links

Hot Topics

The Latest

When the Database Is the Problem, Is APM Enough?

Production incidents rarely announce themselves as database problems. They appear as slow transactions, timeouts, rising response times, or an application struggling under a workload it previously handled. APM provides an essential starting point. It can identify a slow transaction path, highlight an affected service, and show that a database dependency is consuming more time than expected. But identifying the database as part of the problem is not the same as explaining what is happening inside it ...

From Cleanup to Prevention: The Future of Cloud-Native Cost Optimization

Cloud teams are under constant pressure to reduce spend without slowing development or increasing operational risk. They are deploying autoscalers, rightsizing workloads, enforcing resource requests, reviewing utilization dashboards, and building FinOps processes around cloud-native environments. Yet the results often disappoint ...

The Real Enterprise AI Risk Isn't Hallucinations

Ask most IT leaders about their biggest concern with AI and you'll hear the same answer: hallucinations ... Today, however, the conversation has shifted ... As organizations move beyond chatbots and experiments, they are increasingly deploying AI agents that perform multi-step tasks. These systems retrieve documents, query databases, call APIs, generate reports, write code, and make recommendations. The issue is not whether the model can reason. The issue is whether the organization can see, verify, and govern the decisions being made along the way ...

Beyond Buy vs. Build: The New Playbook for Data Pipelines

While organizations want to take control of their telemetry, building telemetry pipelines from scratch can be a very daunting, complicated task, even when leveraging open-source standards like OpenTelemetry. It requires specialized knowledge across distributed systems, data engineering, and security. This fragmented approach across systems causes higher operational costs; it puts a strain on resources and reduces efficiency as teams have to work with different interfaces and processes ...

The Corporate Network Is Fading - Here's What Replaces It

For decades, enterprise networks were designed around a simple assumption: work happened inside the office. Applications lived in centralized data centers, employees connected through internal infrastructure, and security focused on protecting the perimeter that surrounded everything ... But the way organizations operate today bears little resemblance to that environment. Cloud platforms host critical applications, employees connect from homes and airports as often as they do from offices, and partners collaborate through shared systems that exist far beyond corporate walls. In short, the corporate network no longer resembles the environment it was designed to protect ...

IT Leaders Must Establish a Network Data Architecture Practice

As an analyst who researches how IT organizations design, build, and operate their networks, I find that network data is a constant source of pain. Network teams struggle with data quality, fragmentation, authority, access, and trust. And these issues undermine everything they try to do. Here are the numbers: Only 45% of network teams are completely confident in the accuracy of their network source of truth, which documents the intent of their network ...

Data Center Outages Are Decreasing but More Costly

The 2026 Global Data Center Survey from Uptime Institute reveals an industry navigating workforce constraints, escalating outage expenses, even as rising costs remain the top concern for management teams ...

Observability Has a Physical Layer Now: What AI Infrastructure Teaches IT Operations

The next observability gap may not be in the code. It may be under the rack. That sounds strange until you think about how AI incidents actually feel in the middle of an investigation ... The application dashboard may be accurate. It may also be stopping at the wrong boundary. AI systems depend on software, but they also depend on a dense physical stack: racks, power paths, thermal margin, maintenance activity and, in many environments, liquid cooling. Those physical dependencies can change slowly before they look like a software incident ...

TLS Certificate Expiration Is Becoming an Observability Problem

Certificate expiration is the rare outage you can see coming. Every TLS certificate carries the date it stops working, so the moment it will begin breaking connections is knowable in advance. That's what makes an expired certificate such a frustrating way to lose a service. What's changing now is how often that date comes around ...

Enterprise Cloud Observability: Choosing the Right Starting Point

Enterprises operate different combinations of workloads across cloud, hybrid and multicloud environments. For business-critical workloads, teams need to consider monitoring and observability early so they can detect health issues, investigate failures, and understand operational impact. Organizations place workloads on cloud platforms based on a combination of technical requirements, economics, existing dependencies, organizational standards, and business priorities. Their monitoring priorities therefore depend on what they operate and where those systems run. Those priorities will not look the same for every organization ...

Avoiding Cost Traps in Cloud Monitoring

Martin Hirschvogel
Checkmk

Choosing the right approach is critical with cloud monitoring in hybrid environments. Otherwise, you may drive up costs with features you don’t need and risk diminishing the visibility of your on-premises IT.

The complexity of IT infrastructures is constantly growing as organizations continue to combine cloud-based services with on-premises or edge IT infrastructure and adopt Kubernetes or serverless computing services. To ensure that their hybrid IT infrastructure performs optimally, ITOps teams need a monitoring solution that is capable of providing comprehensive visibility while easing their burden.

Different Monitoring Requirements

To avoid blind spots and budget bloat, there are two main questions ITOps needs to consider:

What applications and resources do we run in which part of the infrastructure?

And what monitoring requirements result from this?

This is especially important when considering cloud monitoring solutions. While they provide numerous functions for monitoring applications and computing resources residing in the cloud, they have limitations when it comes to monitoring on-premises environments. So, by operating all their business-critical IT assets locally and "only" virtual machines in the cloud, organizations would risk driving up expenses and impacting IT operations by implementing cloud monitoring.

NonTransparent Pricing Models

Even if an organization is running mission-critical workloads in the cloud, choosing a cloud monitoring solution can quickly result in costs that are unexpected, but ultimately avoidable. This is due to cloud monitoring providers' sometimes opaque billing models that impose a kind of penalty tax on the benefits of the cloud, such as flexibility and scalability. When you add subscriptions for additional features to the high base fee for the software, the initial cost quickly becomes unmanageable.

A virtual server in a popular configuration costs about $100 per month from a hyperscaler. Basic monitoring for such a host typically starts at $15 to $30 from cloud monitoring providers, and the cost can be many times higher depending on the desired feature set and sizing. Even simple monitoring of the operating system can quickly add up to at least 30 percent of the hosting bill.

Expensive Host-Based Billing

Host-based billing may seem simple at first glance. Yet the question arises as to whether host-based billing makes sense at all in a serverless world with managed services, etc., where hosts no longer play a major role.

Also, in a serverless world with managed services from cloud providers, it is difficult to quantify hosts. In the end, this will inevitably lead to the gradual introduction of secondary pricing metrics and, from the user's perspective, to costs that are difficult to predict and a lack of price transparency.

The conceptual problems of host-based pricing are particularly evident in the fact that many monitoring providers have introduced limits and additional price dimensions. For example, in some cases only a certain number of containers per host are included in cloud monitoring. However, this limit is usually quickly exceeded and additional fees apply for each additional container.

Artificial Limits and Custom Metrics

Custom metrics, which allow special data to be included in monitoring, can also quickly drive up costs. This is especially the case if custom metrics are essential for monitoring and you can only obtain useful monitoring by adding them. Artificial currencies or units in monitoring, such as those used to retrieve custom metrics, logs, or user-defined events, and which have complex conversion formulas, also do not necessarily provide a transparent view of costs.

Monitoring costs also vary depending on the cloud provider. For example, with a hyperscaler, all of the API calls that are required to monitor the cloud services cost money. With another provider, the API calls may be free, but you may run into rate limits. These are all cost factors that should be taken into account from the outset when choosing a monitoring solution.

Evaluating a cloud monitoring solution also includes ensuring that the solution supports all of the necessary features and services. Essential features, such as an SSO solution based on the SAML standard, should not be reserved for the higher-tier product and the associated more expensive plan levels.

Wrong Incentives and Exclusive Access

The pricing model of a good monitoring solution should also not create incentives to compromise on infrastructure architecture for cost reasons. For example, if an organization has to pay per monitoring instance, there is a strong temptation to save costs by minimizing the number of instances. However, there is a risk that the monitoring will not scale with the company's infrastructure — negating a key benefit of the cloud.

The goal of IT monitoring is to provide critical insight into IT infrastructure health and performance. Access to monitoring is critical for various teams to gain important insights for their daily work and to ensure smooth IT operations. However, charging on a per-user basis for monitoring could result in this information being made available only to an exclusive group to keep costs down. As a result, responsible individuals and teams would be denied visibility into the IT assets that are important to them, and the monitoring would be of no value to them.

Avoiding Cost Traps

A look at the market shows that the pricing of many monitoring vendors can quickly blow the monitoring budget due to hidden costs or subsequent price drivers — or even encourage the creation of poor IT architectures. If you are not careful, you can quickly end up paying 30 percent of your computing costs for monitoring. For comparison, common benchmarks suggest that ITOps should spend no more than 3 to 15 percent of its IT budget on observability, depending on the industry and the size of the organization.

Organizations should develop clear strategies and understand which business areas are running and will run on which parts of their IT architecture. Only by understanding your cloud and on-premises monitoring needs can you find a tailored solution with a precise and predictable pricing model, rather than paying a lot of money for an oversized solution that may not fit your infrastructure.

Martin Hirschvogel is Chief Product Officer at Checkmk

Related Links

Hot Topics

The Latest

When the Database Is the Problem, Is APM Enough?

Production incidents rarely announce themselves as database problems. They appear as slow transactions, timeouts, rising response times, or an application struggling under a workload it previously handled. APM provides an essential starting point. It can identify a slow transaction path, highlight an affected service, and show that a database dependency is consuming more time than expected. But identifying the database as part of the problem is not the same as explaining what is happening inside it ...

From Cleanup to Prevention: The Future of Cloud-Native Cost Optimization

Cloud teams are under constant pressure to reduce spend without slowing development or increasing operational risk. They are deploying autoscalers, rightsizing workloads, enforcing resource requests, reviewing utilization dashboards, and building FinOps processes around cloud-native environments. Yet the results often disappoint ...

The Real Enterprise AI Risk Isn't Hallucinations

Ask most IT leaders about their biggest concern with AI and you'll hear the same answer: hallucinations ... Today, however, the conversation has shifted ... As organizations move beyond chatbots and experiments, they are increasingly deploying AI agents that perform multi-step tasks. These systems retrieve documents, query databases, call APIs, generate reports, write code, and make recommendations. The issue is not whether the model can reason. The issue is whether the organization can see, verify, and govern the decisions being made along the way ...

Beyond Buy vs. Build: The New Playbook for Data Pipelines

While organizations want to take control of their telemetry, building telemetry pipelines from scratch can be a very daunting, complicated task, even when leveraging open-source standards like OpenTelemetry. It requires specialized knowledge across distributed systems, data engineering, and security. This fragmented approach across systems causes higher operational costs; it puts a strain on resources and reduces efficiency as teams have to work with different interfaces and processes ...

The Corporate Network Is Fading - Here's What Replaces It

For decades, enterprise networks were designed around a simple assumption: work happened inside the office. Applications lived in centralized data centers, employees connected through internal infrastructure, and security focused on protecting the perimeter that surrounded everything ... But the way organizations operate today bears little resemblance to that environment. Cloud platforms host critical applications, employees connect from homes and airports as often as they do from offices, and partners collaborate through shared systems that exist far beyond corporate walls. In short, the corporate network no longer resembles the environment it was designed to protect ...

IT Leaders Must Establish a Network Data Architecture Practice

As an analyst who researches how IT organizations design, build, and operate their networks, I find that network data is a constant source of pain. Network teams struggle with data quality, fragmentation, authority, access, and trust. And these issues undermine everything they try to do. Here are the numbers: Only 45% of network teams are completely confident in the accuracy of their network source of truth, which documents the intent of their network ...

Data Center Outages Are Decreasing but More Costly

The 2026 Global Data Center Survey from Uptime Institute reveals an industry navigating workforce constraints, escalating outage expenses, even as rising costs remain the top concern for management teams ...

Observability Has a Physical Layer Now: What AI Infrastructure Teaches IT Operations

The next observability gap may not be in the code. It may be under the rack. That sounds strange until you think about how AI incidents actually feel in the middle of an investigation ... The application dashboard may be accurate. It may also be stopping at the wrong boundary. AI systems depend on software, but they also depend on a dense physical stack: racks, power paths, thermal margin, maintenance activity and, in many environments, liquid cooling. Those physical dependencies can change slowly before they look like a software incident ...

TLS Certificate Expiration Is Becoming an Observability Problem

Certificate expiration is the rare outage you can see coming. Every TLS certificate carries the date it stops working, so the moment it will begin breaking connections is knowable in advance. That's what makes an expired certificate such a frustrating way to lose a service. What's changing now is how often that date comes around ...

Enterprise Cloud Observability: Choosing the Right Starting Point

Enterprises operate different combinations of workloads across cloud, hybrid and multicloud environments. For business-critical workloads, teams need to consider monitoring and observability early so they can detect health issues, investigate failures, and understand operational impact. Organizations place workloads on cloud platforms based on a combination of technical requirements, economics, existing dependencies, organizational standards, and business priorities. Their monitoring priorities therefore depend on what they operate and where those systems run. Those priorities will not look the same for every organization ...