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

AWS Security Hub vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 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

AWS Security Hub
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (7th)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
91
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (5th), Container Management (6th), Container Security (5th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (1st), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (4th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) category, the mindshare of AWS Security Hub is 2.8%, down from 4.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 6.3%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud6.3%
AWS Security Hub2.8%
Other90.9%
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Karthik Ekambaram - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at Scybers
Has helped identify misconfigurations and prioritize risks but lacks multi-cloud support and deeper integration features
AWS Security Hub cannot scale up to multiple different cloud environments; it only works for AWS. There are other products in the market for CSPM that can give you multi-cloud environment misconfigurations, even Microsoft for that matter. Regarding the integration of AWS Security Hub with third-party tools, I am not certain whether we can integrate them, but there is no need to do so. However, AWS Security Hub cannot integrate with other cloud providers, so it only supports the AWS environment. The compliance checks within AWS Security Hub are good, but we don't use them much. We utilize compliance frameworks such as CIS compliance frameworks and ISO 27017 framework, which are beneficial, but it can improve in other areas too, such as including NIST and other frameworks beyond just ISO and CIS. Improvements can be applicable for scalability, particularly on integration with multi-cloud environments, and compliance frameworks can be added for more variety as well. The unified dashboard in AWS Security Hub is adequate; I cannot say it is exceptional, but the content available in the dashboards is satisfactory for now.
Shivam Dhang - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Infrastructure & Cloud Manager at Softcell Technologies Limited
Continuous posture management has improved cloud risk visibility and accelerated remediation
The best features Microsoft Defender for Cloud offers are the CSPM, which includes continuous posture assessment with prioritized misconfiguration fixes that gives us clear visibility of cloud risk and drift across the environment. Additionally, the CWPP has strong runtime protection for VMs, containers, and PaaS, including multi-cloud visibility. The single pane for Azure, AWS plus GCP with consistent policies and recommendations is noteworthy. What stands out most is the combination of posture management plus runtime protection, which provides both preventive and detective control in one platform. Since using Microsoft Defender for Cloud, we have seen a positive impact such as improved security posture with clear visibility via secure score that helped reduce misconfiguration significantly over time. There has also been faster risk remediation, as we have prioritized recommendations plus auto remediation which has reduced fix time from days to hours for common issues. Better workload protection has resulted in earlier detection of suspicious activity on VMs or containers, preventing potential compromise and lateral movement. The biggest impact is proactive risk reduction plus faster remediation across cloud environments. From our experience, misconfiguration has been reduced to a 40 to 55% drop in critical issues such as public exposures, weak NSG, and IAM gaps within the first few months after continuous tuning. We have saved time with the remediation time reduced by 50 to 60%, or from days to a few hours using prioritized recommendations plus auto remediation. Additionally, secure score improvement has typically risen from a 50 to 55% baseline to 80 to 85% after structured remediation cycles, which were measured by tracking secure score trends, the number of open recommendations, and mean time to remediate.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The advantage is that it is cloud-native, and we do not need to install agents or sensors to find findings."
"Finding out if your infrastructure is secure is a valuable feature."
"The most beneficial aspect of Security Hub is its proactive capability, allowing us to identify potential security issues before they escalate."
"Within AWS Security Hub, there is a feature for aggregating and prioritizing security findings which allows for better risk prioritization based on misconfiguration, as they know AWS thoroughly."
"AWS Security Hub can check your infrastructure against multiple compliance frameworks. You can turn on or off specific frameworks based on your needs."
"One of the most effective features of AWS Security Hub is the easy access to a dashboard with a ready-to-use security score."
"It's a security posture management tool from AWS. Basically, it identifies misconfigurations, similar to Trusted Advisor but on a larger scale."
"The solution is very good at detection and providing real-time alerts."
"Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture, providing us with a prioritized list of security issues to remedy, which improves our security operations because we know what to tackle first."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its support for cloud-native services like Kubernetes, containers, managed storage, and databases. Protecting these without Microsoft Defender for Cloud would be extremely challenging. For threat protection specifically, I find the signature-based detection and heuristic detection features very effective."
"The scalability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is very good."
"The technical support is very good."
"I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a ten."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"For organizations who have an on-prem environment and are planning to move to a cloud-based solution, Azure Security Center is definitely one of the best tools that they can use."
"The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents."
 

Cons

"Whenever my team gets some alarms from the central team, my team needs to initiate whether it's a real or false trigger. The central team needs to keep adjusting to the parameters or at least the concerned IPs, whether it's really from the company's pool of IPs, so the trigger process can be improved. In the next release of AWS Security Hub, I'd like a better dashboard that could result in better alert visibility."
"Shortening the response time for support tickets, particularly in production issues, could make the service more efficient."
"AWS Security Hub's configuration and integration are areas where it lacks and needs to improve."
"The solution is not wholly self-sufficient."
"It's not user-friendly. Too much going on, too many unnecessary findings, not very visual. You can't do much compared to other similar tools that are cheaper and better."
"Security needs to be measured based on their own criteria. We can't add custom criteria specific to our organization. For example, having an S3 bucket publicly available might be flagged as a critical alert, but it might not be critical in a sandbox environment. So, it gets flagged as critical, which becomes a false positive. So, customization options and creating custom dashboards would be areas for improvement."
"The telemetry doesn't always go into the control center. When you have multiple instances running in AWS, you need a control tower to take feeds from Security Hub and analyze your results. Sometimes exemptions aren't passed between the control tower and Security Hub. The configuration gets mixed up or you don't get the desired results."
"The support must be quicker."
"Defender could improve how data is represented. It can be unstructured or slow to load."
"I felt that there was disconnection in terms of understanding the UI. The communication for moving from the old UI to the new UI could be improved."
"The solution could extend its capabilities to other cloud providers. Right now, if you want to monitor a virtual machine on another cloud, you can do that. However, this cannot be done with other cloud platform services. I hope once that is available then Defender for Cloud will be a unified solution for all cloud platform services."
"My experience with Microsoft Defender for Cloud has been largely negative due to a poor user experience."
"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."
"I would like to see more connectors and plugins with other platforms."
"It's very expensive in terms of the need to maintain it actively."
"Customizing some of the compliance requirements based on individual needs seems like the biggest area of improvement. There should be an option to turn specific controls on and off based on how your solution is configured."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are multiple subscription models, like yearly, monthly, and packaged."
"Security Hub is not an expensive solution."
"The cost is based on the number of compliances, core checks, and services required, and for more than 10,000 recommendations, the charge is just one dollar."
"The pricing is fine. It is not an expensive tool."
"The price of the solution is not very competitive but it is reasonable."
"The price of AWS Security Hub is average compared to other solutions."
"AWS Security Hub is not an expensive tool. I would consider it to be a cheap solution. AWS Security Hub follows the PAYG pricing model, meaning you will have to pay for whatever you use."
"AWS Security Hub's pricing is pretty reasonable."
"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."
"I'm not privy to that information, but I know it's probably close to a million dollars a year."
"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."
"This solution is more cost-effective than some competing products. My understanding is that it is based on the number of integrations that you have, so if you have fewer subscriptions then you pay less for the service."
"Pricing depends on your workload size, but it is very cheap. If you're talking about virtual machines, it is $5 or something for each machine, which is minimal. If you go for some agent-based solution for every virtual machine, then you need to pay the same thing or more than that. For an on-premises solution like this, we were paying around $30 to $50 based on size. With Defender, Microsoft doesn't bother about the size. You pay based on the number of machines. So, if you have 10 virtual machines, and 10 virtual machines are being monitored, you are paying based on that rather than the size of the virtual machine. Thus, you are paying for the number of units rather than paying for the size of your units."
"Pricing is a consideration, but we strive to keep costs low by enabling only necessary services."
"It has global licensing. It comes with multiple licenses since there are around 50,000 people (in our organization) who look at it."
"We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) solutions are best for your needs.
892,776 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186927 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Operations at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Feb 16, 2015
Cybereason vs. Interset vs. SQRRL
Capture DB - they all use NoSQL db and hence solve the ad hoc query and 'go back in time' problem with current best of breed SIEM and DLP solutions that rely on real time analysis of incoming logs (and don't store them). This means deeper and quicker iterative threat analysis and assessment…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise49
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Azure Sentinel or AWS Security Hub?
We like that Azure Sentinel does not require as much maintenance as legacy SIEMs that are on-premises. Azure Sentinel is auto-scaling - you will not have to worry about performance impact, you will...
What needs improvement with AWS Security Hub?
AWS Security Hub cannot scale up to multiple different cloud environments; it only works for AWS. There are other products in the market for CSPM that can give you multi-cloud environment misconfig...
What is your primary use case for AWS Security Hub?
The major use case for identifying misconfigurations within the AWS environment focuses on determining whether the administrators have configured everything correctly, giving a better picture of AW...
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 across your ecosystem. It also has great remote workforce capabilities and supports a...
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 and support had no issues.
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 ingestion cost perspective. Depending on what license you choose, you might have to p...
 

Also Known As

SQRRL
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edmunds, Frame.io, GoDaddy, Realtor.com
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 AWS Security Hub vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
892,776 professionals have used our research since 2012.