Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs Uptycs comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (5th), Cloud and Data Center Security (3rd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Compliance Management (1st)
Aqua Cloud Security Platform
Ranking in Container Security
14th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
16th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (12th), Software Supply Chain Security (9th), DevSecOps (8th)
Uptycs
Ranking in Container Security
33rd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
21st
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
21st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (52nd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (50th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (31st), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (27th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 3.7%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Aqua Cloud Security Platform is 3.7%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Uptycs is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.
Burak AKCAGUN - PeerSpot reviewer
A robust and cost-effective solution, excelling in scalability, on-premises support, and responsive technical support, making it well-suited for enterprises navigating stringent regulatory environment
The most crucial aspect is runtime protection, specifically image scanning before preproduction and deployment. Customers find it invaluable to have the ability to check for vulnerabilities in an image before deployment, similar to a sandbox environment. This feature ensures that customers can identify any potential issues with the image, such as misconfigurations or vulnerabilities, before integrating it into their workloads and infrastructure. In their source pipeline, companies can identify issues before deploying changes. This is crucial because customers prefer resolving any problems or misconfigurations before the deployment process. Software change security, including GSPM Cloud, is a key feature customers seek in their infrastructure.
reviewer2301639 - PeerSpot reviewer
Great features, good support, and lots of functionality
I'm an end-user. We use the solution on multiple clouds. I'd advise users to validate which product and metrics will help them the most. The solution has multiple functionalities. Don't go in blindly. Know what you want to get out of the product. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten based on the scalability potential.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the easy-to-understand user interface, which allows even non-technical users to comprehend and resolve issues."
"The cloud misconfiguration feature and Offensive Security Engine, as well as their alerting process, are valuable."
"The UI is very good."
"The key strength of Singularity Cloud Security lies in its ability to pinpoint vulnerabilities in our cloud accounts and identify suspicious activity that warrants further investigation."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers valuable scalability suitable for organizations of all sizes, from small businesses to large enterprises."
"Our organization is growing steadily, so our infrastructure is expanding, and we're managing more technical resources. Singularity Cloud Security helps us track our resources so that we don't get lost in the overwhelming volume of things and ensures we follow best practices. The solution gives us better visibility into our resources and enables faster resolution."
"We really appreciate the Slack integration. When we have an incident, we get an instant notification. We also use Joe Sandbox, which Singularity can integrate with, so we can verify if a threat is legitimate."
"Singularity Cloud Workload Security provides us with better security detection and more visibility. It is another resource that we can use to detect vulnerabilities in our company's systems. For example, it can help us detect new file processes that we are not familiar with, which could be used by attackers to exploit our systems. Singularity Cloud Workload Security can also help us diagnose and analyze data to determine whether it is malicious or not. Singularity Cloud Workload Security is like another pair of eyes that can help us protect our systems from cyberattacks."
"We use Aqua Security for the container security features."
"The CSPM product is great at securing our cloud accounts and I really like the runtime protection for containers and functions too."
"Aqua Security allowed us to gain visibility into the vulnerabilities that were present in the container images, that were being rolled out, the amount of risk that we were introducing to the platform, and provided us a look into the container environment by introducing access control mechanisms. In addition, when it came to runtime-level policies, we could restrict container access to resources in our environment, such as network-level or other application-level access."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"Support is very helpful."
"From what I understand, the initial setup is simple."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"They have multiple great features."
 

Cons

"The documentation could be better."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"There is room for improvement in application security posture management features, and SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is on the costlier side."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"I export CSV. I cannot export graphs. Restricting it to the CSV format has its own disadvantages. These are all machine IP addresses and information. I cannot change it to the JSON format. The export functionality can be improved."
"We've found a lot of false positives."
"From my personal experience, the alerting system needs to be faster. If something happens in our infrastructure, the alert appears on the dashboard, but I have to log in to the dashboard and refresh it."
"They can add more widgets to its dashboard. A centralized dashboard with numerous metrics would improve user understanding."
"Sometimes I got stressed with the UI."
"They want to release improvements to their product to work with other servers because now there are more focused on the Kubernetes environment. They need to improve the normal servers. I would like to have more options."
"It's a bit hard to use the user roles. That was a bit confusing."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"The integrations on CICD could be improved. If Aqua had more plugins or container images to integrate and automate more easily on CICD, it would be better."
"Aqua Security could improve the forwarding of logging into Splunk and into other tools, it should be easier."
"Aqua Security could provide more open documentation so that their learning resources can be more easily accessed and searched through online. Right now, a lot of the documentation is closed and not available to the public."
"The solution could improve user-friendliness."
"We end up facing a lot of issues after upgrades."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We found it to be fine for us. Its price was competitive. It was something we were happy with. We are not a Fortune 500 company, so I do not know how pricing scales at the top end, but for our cloud environment, it works very well."
"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
"It's not expensive. The product is in its initial growth stages and appears more competitive compared to others. It comes in different variants, and I believe the enterprise version costs around $55 per user per year. I would rate it a five, somewhere fairly moderate."
"The cost for PingSafe is average when compared to other CSPM tools."
"Its pricing was a little less than other providers."
"It's not cheap, but it is worth the price."
"I am personally not taking care of the pricing part, but when we moved from CrowdStrike to PingSafe, there were some savings. The price of CrowdStrike was quite high. Compared to that, the price of PingSafe was low. PingSafe is charging based on the subscription model. If I want to add an AWS subscription, I need to pay more. It should not be based on subscription. It should be based on the number of servers that I am scanning."
"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"It comes at a reasonable cost."
"Dealing with licensing costs isn't my responsibility, but I know that the licenses don't depend on the number of users, but instead are priced according to your workload."
"Aqua Security is not cheap, and it's not very expensive, such as Splunk, they are in the middle."
"The pricing of this solution could be improved."
"They were reasonable with their pricing. They were pretty down-to-earth about the way they pitched their product and the way they tried to close the deal. They were one of the rare companies that approached the whole valuation in a way that made sense for our company, for our needs, and for their own requirements as well... They will accommodate your needs if they are able to understand them and they're stated clearly."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) solutions are best for your needs.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Non Profit
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
I don't handle the price part, but it isn't more expensive than Palo Alto Prisma Cloud. It's not cheap, but it is wor...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
There is scope for more application security posture management features. Additionally, the runtime protection needs ...
What do you think of Aqua Security vs Prisma Cloud?
Aqua Security is easy to use and very manageable. Its main focus is on Kubernetes and Docker. Security is a very valu...
What do you like most about Aqua Security?
Customers find it invaluable to have the ability to check for vulnerabilities in an image before deployment, similar ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aqua Security?
It comes at a reasonable cost. When compared to Prisma Cloud, it is more budget-friendly.
What do you like most about Uptycs?
They have multiple great features.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Uptycs?
The pricing is moderate compared to other products in the market. However, it is not the cheapest option. Depending o...
What needs improvement with Uptycs?
The one thing missing is the IPS part, the blocking part. We end up facing a lot of issues after upgrades.
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Aqua Security Platform, CloudSploit, Argon
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
HPE Salesforce Telstra Ellie Mae Cathay Pacific HomeAway
Comcast, Crossbeam, Flexport, Greenlight Financial, Lookout Security, PayNearMe
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, SentinelOne and others in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP). Updated: June 2025.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.