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

AccuKnox Platform vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 8, 2026

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

Qualys TotalCloud
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
8th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
7th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
6th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
6th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (5th), SaaS Security Posture Management (SSPM) (2nd)
AccuKnox Platform
Ranking in Container Security
51st
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
27th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
36th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
24th
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (9th)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Container Security
4th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
1st
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
3rd
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (11th), Container Management (8th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (7th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (4th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) category, the mindshare of Qualys TotalCloud is 2.4%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of AccuKnox Platform is 1.5%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 6.5%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud6.5%
Qualys TotalCloud2.4%
AccuKnox Platform1.5%
Other89.6%
Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2859021 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Security Engineer at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees
Risk-based triage has transformed container security and now prioritizes high-impact threats
The best features Qualys TotalCloud offers currently include managing cloud infrastructure and container security while facing major challenges such as alert fatigue. Traditional vulnerability scanners flag hundreds of CVEs on short-lived Kubernetes containers, some of which have no internet exposure or are gone before we can even triage them. I leverage Qualys TotalCloud to move beyond static CVSS. I use it to implement runtime exposure, correlation risk reprioritization, and shift-left integration. This notifies developers to fix a base image upstream rather than patching live ephemeral instances. In my work with cloud and container security, the biggest operational hurdle was alert fatigue. I use Qualys to shift left from static CVSS severity to context-aware risk prioritization. I correlated raw vulnerability data with real-time risk factors such as public network exposure, active runtime execution, or overly permissive IAM roles. This allows us to immediately drop the priority of isolated containers and escalate lower-severity CVEs that sit on an exposed, high-risk path. We can map these findings directly back to our CI/CD pipelines so developers can patch the root base images upstream. We have drastically cut down the signal-to-noise ratio, saved a lot of manual hours doing triage work, and ensured engineering effort goes directly towards high-impact risk reduction.
RaviUpadhyay - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at HCLSoftware
Uses unique technologies for container security, flexible integration but lacks good user experience
There should always be some customized reports included. The dashboard is one thing, and the second is a report. Based on that, users can assist their environment. For example, for some Terraform code, customers want end-to-end things with their tool. They don’t want multiple tools. For a specific purpose, we need to look at different tools. They will look for a solution in one platform only so that the cost can be saved. If we use multiple tools, it means we need to give access to different ports in their environment. It is basically a kind of security compromise happening. Users have a lot of ports being used. So, basically, users don’t want to use multiple tools. They want a single tool that includes multiple features. The report part was missing. Also, some kind of clarity [flow clarity] is not in the tool as of now, but they are working on it. For example, if somebody manages the tool in their environment, the tool should be user-friendly. But this tool is not user-friendly as of now. This tool needs some kind of improvement so that new users or new security engineers can understand all the things in a short period of time. They can understand what is happening and how we can provide. They are catching the customer needs and working along with their development team. For example, some of the policies customers wanted to be placed at the organization level were missing. But AccuKnox have projections as well. Some of the good things they have used are flexible to integrate with other tools. For example, not from the security point of view, but maybe CI/CD, some third-party tools helping out to optimize the container image in terms of being lightweight or having a very low surface level. Basically, it protects against surface attacks. If a heavier image is used, it takes time to upload and impacts overall application performance. So, some tools are good for optimization.
RW
Head Of IT at Cirrus Response
Cloud security has cut investigation time and now reveals threats faster but needs simpler oversight
When deploying AI applications, my key security concerns with Microsoft Defender for Cloud are data loss, leakage of data, and guardrails around the actual AI, and I am hoping that this is going to help me put those guardrails in place and identify data exfiltration. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has not helped me manage and secure multi-cloud environments, as we are 100 percent Microsoft and have not really got it in any other environment at all. I am not yet using the unified AI-powered security feature offered by Microsoft Defender for Cloud, but that is coming. I am not yet using the integrated XDR feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud, but that is coming. I am not yet utilizing the GenAI threat protection features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud. That is also coming and a lot of that will come from learning it here. I have enabled the agentless scanning in my cloud environment with Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Assessing the impact on my workload protection without needing to install agents with Microsoft Defender for Cloud makes it a lot easier, but it also identifies a lot more, which puts more load on me sometimes. I would advise another organization considering Microsoft Defender for Cloud that it is the most logical route to follow if their whole ecosystem is Microsoft. It is easy to implement and it is very self-explanatory when doing it, making sense to just follow the steps as it is too simple, really. I would rate this review a 7.5 out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"In my opinion, this is the best tool."
"The vulnerability management feature is the one I like the most because it provides a clear picture of all vulnerabilities."
"Generally, Qualys is very good at detections, whether on cloud or on-prem, and the agent allows deployment on both infrastructures, providing continuous monitoring of your assets, which is a key selling point for us."
"Qualys TotalCloud has improved our security posture."
"Qualys TotalCloud provides a single, prioritized view of risk, reducing the workload associated with consolidating multiple sources for risk prioritization."
"The best feature would be the ability to create policies. It is easy to control and update policies as required."
"I rate the breadth of FlexScan in providing visibility into on-premises, multicloud, and container environments as fantastic."
"Once it is set up, Qualys has proved to be one of our greatest assets."
"The platform is strong in container and kernel-level security."
"The dashboard is very good; it gives our clients a lot of information and allows them to have a complete overview of the system, with everything visible in one glance."
"We are using this solution to implement our CAS policy and it monitors compliance with the Security Center, and we also use it for threat protection as it detects any threats and provides threat recommendations."
"Azure Security Center has helped to improve our security posture."
"Defender for Cloud is a plug-and-play solution that provides continuous posture management once enabled."
"There is no better tool found to protect workloads in Azure than Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is its ability to assess an environment and give us a clear idea of what security components are lacking and which are not."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud helps in improving our overall security posture. We have a nice overview of what is missing where and what can be improved."
"The solution helped out management a lot, reducing about 50% of the time needed to spend on this after implementation and saving the organization money by consolidating into one solution instead of two or three."
 

Cons

"To improve the user experience, reporting could be simplified for better comprehension by end users and project managers, facilitating issue resolution."
"Qualys TotalCloud needs to enhance its scanning capabilities in the IP domain, as it currently lacks the functionality to resolve IPs to their corresponding domain names."
"The onboarding process is a bit difficult. In the initial phase, it is very difficult to understand the features, what the dashboard contains, and what criteria they are using."
"In my opinion, the combination of detection and protection features in Qualys TotalCloud cannot protect but can only detect."
"Qualys's ticketing system can be confusing when assigning tasks to individuals, and support could be improved by offering instant call solutions with engineers in addition to ticket replies."
"There is a lack of data segregation according to criticality or inventory."
"Their customer support needs improvement."
"Their support could be improved."
"AccuKnox platform have AI-based features, but those aren’t fully developed yet."
"Features like code scanning and pipeline scanning are not included in the solution."
"Although Microsoft Defender for Cloud is based on security, I wish it went beyond providing assessments, reports, and generic steps. More detailed procedures would be helpful, especially for lower-level support staff."
"Agent features need to be improved. They support agents through Azure Arc or Workbench. Sometimes, we are not able to get correct signals from the machines on which we have installed these agents. We are not able to see how many are currently reporting to Azure Security Center, and how many are currently not reporting. For example, we have 1,000 machines, and we have enrolled 1,000 OMS agents on these machines to collect the log. When I look at the status, even though at some places, it shows that it is connected, but when I actually go and check, I'm not getting any alerts from those. There are some discrepancies on the agent, and the agent features are not up to the mark."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters. It could be cheaper."
"There are many unknowns with AI applications. AI agents will operate while you're not present, whether you are sleeping or awake, and it's unclear whether there would be any exfiltration of data or how data is being managed."
"I would suggest building a single product that addresses endpoint server protection, attack surface, and everything else in one solution. That is the main disadvantage with the product. If we are incorporating some features, we end up in a situation where this solution is for the server, and that one is for the client, or this is for identity, and that is for our application. They're not bundling it. Commercially, we can charge for different licenses, but on the implementation side, it's tough to help our end-customer understand which product they're getting."
"Most of the time, when we log into the support, we don't get a chance to interact with Microsoft employees directly, except having it go to outsource employees of Microsoft."
"The pricing could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Qualys TotalCloud offers cost-effective licensing flexibility."
"Qualys TotalCloud is expensive, but it offers a premier solution with no headaches."
"Qualys TotalCloud offers competitive pricing given its comprehensive suite of features, including integration, assessment, remediation, and detection capabilities, all within a single platform."
"Although Qualys TotalCloud is relatively expensive due to its unique automation features, its cost-effectiveness is rated an eight out of ten, with ten being the most costly."
"The pricing for TotalCloud is attractive and competitive in the market. Given the features, especially the dashboard, I have no concerns regarding pricing."
"TotalCloud's price is about right where I would expect it to be."
"The pricing is comparable. It is built into our other product, so I cannot piecemeal it. It is a part of our subscription."
"As a middle management member, I do not have direct pricing knowledge, but based on the knowledge from our meetings, its pricing is competitive."
Information not available
"Azure Defender is a bit pricey. The price could be lower."
"The pricing is very difficult because every type of Defender for Cloud has its own metrics and pricing. If you have Cloud for Key Vault, the pricing is different than it is for storage. Every type has its own pricing list and rules."
"We only use the free tier, so we haven't faced any pricing, setup costs, or licensing challenges."
"The pricing and licensing of Microsoft Defender for Cloud have been good for us. We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters."
"Azure Defender is definitely pricey, but their competitors cost about the same. For example, a Palo Alto solution is the same price per endpoint, but the ground strikes cost a bit more than Azure Defender. Still, it's pricey for a company like ours. Maybe well-established organizations can afford it, but it might be too costly for a startup."
"Defender's basic version is free, which is good. Many of our teams are evaluating the paid version against third-party products."
"Understanding the costs of cloud services can be complicated at first. As with a lot of things in the cloud, it can be quite hard to understand the end cost, but it becomes clearer over time. Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something. It is clever marketing, and there is room for improvement there. There should be clarity from the start."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
18%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Media Company
13%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise39
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise49
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys TotalCloud?
We purchased Qualys TotalCloud for GCP and Azure as well. It is comparatively better than others regarding pricing. T...
What needs improvement with Qualys TotalCloud?
I am unsure about how Qualys TotalCloud can be improved. I do not have anything else to add about the needed improvem...
What is your primary use case for Qualys TotalCloud?
My main use case for Qualys TotalCloud is telemetry, although I am unsure about the specifics. A quick specific examp...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How is Prisma Cloud vs Azure Security Center for security?
Azure Security Center is very easy to use, integrates well, and gives very good visibility on what is happening acros...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing was that the license cost was the only consideration. Setup an...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
To improve Microsoft Defender for Cloud, I think pricing-wise, the license price is a little bit higher from an inges...
 

Also Known As

Qualys TotalCloud with FlexScan
No data available
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Wiz, SentinelOne, Palo Alto Networks and others in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP). Updated: October 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.