Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Amazon Macie based on the interviews we conducted with its users.
The top alternative solutions include Varonis Platform, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, and Symantec Data Loss Prevention.
The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.
Amazon Web Services (AWS) Alternatives Report
Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Amazon Web Services (AWS), and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Amazon Macie offers scalable, cloud-native data protection with machine learning-enhanced threat detection. In comparison, Varonis Platform excels in detailed data security and deep system insights, catering to hybrid and on-premises environments, providing comprehensive analytics and permissions management for complex security needs.
Amazon Macie is favored for its AI-driven insights at a competitive price. In comparison, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention appeals with broader security measures, integrating extensively into existing Microsoft systems, offering value for enterprises seeking comprehensive data governance within their ecosystem.
Symantec DLP appeals to buyers needing comprehensive policy enforcement across various environments. In comparison, Amazon Macie attracts those prioritizing automation within AWS. Symantec requires a complex setup, while Macie offers simplicity and scalability, suiting AWS-centric organizations seeking automated insights.
Symantec Data Loss Prevention involves a higher setup cost, while Amazon Macie offers a more budget-friendly alternative, reflecting their distinct pricing strategies.
Symantec Data Loss Prevention involves a higher setup cost, while Amazon Macie offers a more budget-friendly alternative, reflecting their distinct pricing strategies.
Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention provides excellent customer support and cost-effectiveness. In comparison, Amazon Macie, with its automation and scalability features, attracts businesses using AWS. Trend Micro's traditional setup contrasts with Macie's seamless AWS integration, making each suitable for distinct environments.
Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention requires more upfront investment, offering comprehensive protection, while Amazon Macie presents a lower setup cost, ideal for AWS users seeking efficient data classification and protection.
Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention requires more upfront investment, offering comprehensive protection, while Amazon Macie presents a lower setup cost, ideal for AWS users seeking efficient data classification and protection.
Amazon Macie offers AWS-focused automated data discovery and protection, making it ideal for AWS users. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks DLP provides extensive, platform-wide protection, appealing to organizations seeking comprehensive coverage across multiple environments. Macie's usage-based pricing contrasts with Palo Alto's upfront investment in robust security.
Amazon Macie typically offers a lower setup cost compared to Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention, highlighting key cost differences. Palo Alto Networks requires a more substantial initial investment, emphasizing its robust feature set.
Amazon Macie typically offers a lower setup cost compared to Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention, highlighting key cost differences. Palo Alto Networks requires a more substantial initial investment, emphasizing its robust feature set.
Amazon Macie excels in AWS integration and ease of use, attracting AWS-centric users seeking data privacy management. In comparison, Netskope DLP provides robust threat protection and granular policies, appealing to businesses needing comprehensive security in varied cloud applications and web traffic.
Google Cloud Data Loss Prevention helps detect and protect sensitive data. Its machine learning-based classification and flexible API are valuable features. Some users find room for improvement in pricing transparency and integration capabilities with third-party tools. It effectively addresses diverse data protection needs.
