We performed a comparison between AWS Control Tower and CloudCheckr based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."AWS Control Tower helps companies save costs."
"Compliance is the most valuable feature."
"AWS Control Tower helps to save a lot of work and manage multiple accounts."
"It provides a central point for account management, access control, and compliance monitoring."
"The most significant benefit of Control Tower is its capability to align with our organization's standards."
"With Control Tower, there are ready-to-use automated templates available, simplifying the implementation of a centralized management solution."
"It is incredibly user-friendly and functions seamlessly."
"One of the standout advantages is the fine-grained control it offers in terms of permissions and privileges."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"The solution is mostly stable."
"The best feature I like about CloudCheckr CMx High Security is its simplicity. I love that it's not rocket science to use the solution. Even if you're not familiar with the cloud, you can easily figure out how to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You can use AWS, you can use Azure, and you can use GCP with the solution because the integration is quite simple. You can also use multi-cloud with it, and you could see the billing part. You'll have complete visibility into your cost which I love about the solution. I also love that data on any security issues and vulnerabilities are available on the go with CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You don't need to do anything different. Just run the scan and you'll have all these open findings in the tool, in terms of the priority level, so if it's critical, it will tell you, "It's critical," and you need to fix it right away."
"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."
"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."
"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The solution is scalable for our purposes."
"The product's affordability depends on the value it brings to specific organizations."
"It could be improved by having a more intuitive graphical interface. It could also include other coding languages like PowerShell and Python, as it would be beneficial for DevOps recommendations."
"AWS Control Tower should improve its fast execution. It also needs more tools for triggering and monitoring AWS services. AWS Control Tower needs more tracking as well."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The integration with other AWS functions has room for improvement."
"It would be beneficial if AWS offered the capability to seamlessly deploy your infrastructure to another region to ensure continuous availability and redundancy."
"The sole drawback is its restriction to enable only one Control Tower."
"By making APIs and organizational units more centralized, it would be simpler to pinpoint the source of issues in case of a breach and would ultimately benefit everyone involved."
"CloudCheckr CMx High Security is complex. There are a lot of menus, and if you do not know what you are looking for you can get lost. However, the interface is self-explanatory. It's easy to understand where to go to get what you want."
"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."
"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."
"What needs to be improved in CloudCheckr CMx High Security is integration. All the clouds are going quite fast, for example, all the cloud providers: Microsoft, Google, etc. CloudCheckr CMx High Security is good with AWS, no doubt about it, but with Azure and Google Cloud, I find that the solution is slow in that direction. If the vendor planned for CloudCheckr CMx High Security to be automated just for AWS, then it does make sense. If not, if the vendor is also targeting good integration with Google and Microsoft, then CloudCheckr CMx High Security integration needs improvement, in particular, it has to be faster. At the moment, its integration with Azure is not as good as its integration with AWS. With GCP, integration is nowhere."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."
"The solution must improve its user interface."
AWS Control Tower is ranked 11th in Cloud Management with 15 reviews while CloudCheckr is ranked 24th in Cloud Management with 8 reviews. AWS Control Tower is rated 8.2, while CloudCheckr is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AWS Control Tower writes "A robust protection for efficient cloud governance and security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CloudCheckr writes "Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support". AWS Control Tower is most compared with AWS Trusted Advisor, Oracle Enterprise Manager Cloud Control, VMware Aria Automation, Morpheus and VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, whereas CloudCheckr is most compared with Azure Cost Management, AWS Trusted Advisor, Apptio One, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our AWS Control Tower vs. CloudCheckr report.
See our list of best Cloud Management vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Management 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.