We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and Saviynt based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is the preferred choice over Saviynt as it provides comprehensive threat protection, anti-spam capabilities, and integration with other Microsoft technologies. Users appreciate the real-time graphical data and ability to monitor applications at an enterprise level. Although there is room for improvement in features, integration, and pricing, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has provided various returns on investment for organizations, including cost reductions, faster reaction times, and increased uptime. Overall, it is considered a valuable add-on to existing Microsoft licenses.
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The solution is stable."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The product helps us with privileged identity management to control who has access to what and for how long."
"The feature that helps us in detecting the sensitive information being shared has been very useful. In addition, the feature that allows MCAS to apply policies with SharePoint, Teams, and OneDrive is being used predominantly."
"I like the web GUI/the management interface. I also like the security of Microsoft. As compared to other manufacturers, it's less complex and easy to understand and work with."
"On-demand scanning is the most valuable feature. In addition, it's a fairly fluid product. It syncs back to the cloud and provides metrics. It's pretty intelligent."
"One of the most valuable features is auditing. Some of the other protection services have issues with auditing. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has an excellent auditing technique that helps us avoid the risk of filtering or information loss. You can use different tools to guarantee these things. It allows you to conduct an in-depth exploration of applications, users, and files that are harmful or suspicious. You can also enhance your security setup by creating personalized rules or policies that help you better control traffic in the cloud."
"There are a lot of features with benefits, including discovery, investigation, and putting controls around things. You can't say that you like the investigation part but not the discovery. Everything is correlated; that's how the tool works."
"Defender's integration with our identity solutions is critical in our current setup."
"The ability to prevent users from using certain applications is one of the most valuable features. It doesn't require any configuration for implementation from the client perspective. It just works right away and gives you the information you need."
"The workflow in Saviynt is easier compared to other tools. It's pretty straightforward."
"The feature that we use the most is the global, third-party user management."
"Saviynt provides built-in access recommendations, while SailPoint IdentityNow offers access recommendations through a separate AI integration that requires additional licensing. Saviynt functions as a unified platform for various business operations, consolidating user and access data from multiple sources into a single platform. This allows for leveraging the same user base and data across different business functions, including access governance, privileged access management, data access governance, and third-party access governance. In contrast, SailPoint is a decoupled tool, requiring separate integration for managing access and permissions, especially for unstructured data. Saviynt's approach is more integrated and streamlined, providing a unified platform for access recommendations and various business operations."
"It gives very good and in-depth knowledge about a particular identity. Everything is through a single click. We get to know the workflows related to a particular identity with a single click."
"Some of the self-service capabilities are quite powerful."
"We have found the implementation process to be very easy."
"Saviynt has a lot of potential with many features available for users."
"It is a flexible tool because it works on JSON."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"Sometimes, we'll get false positive alarms. For example, when a SharePoint path has no file sharing, but there is an external user, it will trigger an alarm that the file has been shared with an external user... the alerting mechanism should be more precise when giving you an alert about what activity has been done with the file..."
"I would like more customization of notifications. Currently, you either get everything or you get limited information. I would like to have something in between where we can customize the data that is included in notifications."
"They need to improve the attack surface reduction (ASR) rules. In the latest version, you can implement ASR rules, which are quite useful, but you have to enable those because if they're not enabled, they flag false positives. In the Defender portal, it logs a block for WMI processes and PowerShell. Apparently, it's because ASR rules are not configured. So, you generally have to enable them to exclude, for example, WMI queries or PowerShell because they have a habit of blocking your security scanners. It's a bit weird that they have to be enabled to be configured, and it's not the other way around."
"Sometimes the support is actually lacking."
"The response time could be better. It will be helpful if the alerts are even more proactive and we can see more data. Currently, the data is a little bit weak. It is not complete. I can't just see it and completely know which user or which device it is. It takes some effort and time on my part to investigate and isolate a user. It would be great if it is more user-friendly or easy for people to understand."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps’s technical support services needs improvement."
"Defender for Cloud apps is primarily useful for Azure apps. It has limited capabilities for applications based on other cloud platforms."
"Defender for Cloud Apps could come with more configured policies out of the box. Also, integration could be easier. Integration is moderately difficult because Microsoft hasn't developed a solution that unifies device onboarding and management. You have to use Intune to manage devices and Defender for Endpoint to enforce policies. They need to fix their integration, but I believe they will straighten it out by the end of the year."
"We sometimes experience performance issues when the solution fails to process the data between two different applications."
"According to feedback I've received, some users prefer SailPoint over Saviynt in real complex environments. SailPoint has its provisioning platform. Complex integrations may pose challenges in scenarios like a large bank with thousands of users, making SailPoint a preferred choice for some."
"Both SailPoint IdentityNow and Saviynt have some bugs, but SailPoint is considered more mature with fewer bugs due to its longer establishment in the market since around 2005. SailPoint had its share of bugs in the early days, but they have resolved them over time, resulting in a stable product. Saviynt, on the other hand, was launched around 2013 or 2014 and is actively working to improve its product. Despite having some bugs, Saviynt is making progress and aims to build a stable product, but it is not there yet."
"The technical support team's response time could be improved."
"The solution is hosted on AWS cloud, and there is some dependency that affects our bottom line."
"UI and support could be improved. The frequent updates and version changes can be disruptive for large organizations. Not every month, a large organization can go with the changes. Saviynt needs to consider this carefully."
"The company needs to do more to establish standard practices within the product itself that are common in the industry."
"The UI doesn’t enhance the user experience."
More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is ranked 2nd in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 30 reviews while Saviynt is ranked 7th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 21 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is rated 8.4, while Saviynt is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps writes "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Saviynt writes "Used for IAM, IGA, MFA, SSO, and access management". Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Microsoft Defender for Identity, whereas Saviynt is most compared with SailPoint Identity Security Cloud, Microsoft Entra ID, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Okta Workforce Identity and Microsoft Identity Manager. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Saviynt report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.