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

Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs Chainguard Containers comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

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

Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)
Ranking in Container Security
21st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Chainguard Containers
Ranking in Container Security
36th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Container Image Security (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is 0.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Chainguard Containers is 1.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)0.8%
Chainguard Containers1.0%
Other98.2%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Daniel Wichinescki - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Specialist | SRE | Cloud Public and Private at Parana Banco
Has supported production deployments and simplified permission management though could reduce monitoring costs
For Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), we only used it to orchestrate the Kubernetes pods. We didn't use the other features. We only used the environment to start our application. I utilized the automatic scaling capabilities. The integration with Azure Active Directory helped with the security of our applications. I think Amazon EKS is better. EKS is the best because there are many features to use for scaling and to control the environments.
Abhishek - PeerSpot reviewer
DevSecOps at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Secured container workloads have reduced noise and monitoring improves with better debugging options
There are a lot of certain points where I feel that having the functionality of having debugging and ensuring that if I like, I can have the dependence of things where things I felt were lacking. Overall, the tool itself is kind of a great start for my evaluation. Because we are currently evaluating, we will have much more of an understanding of this tool again in the near future. If you talk about the concurrent processing, there is some bit of mismanagement happening in Chainguard Containers, which I do not like about it and which is kind of a deal breaker for me. On terms of scalability, because it is hosted on Kubernetes, there is no issue with the scaling and handling the infrastructure. However, when it comes to processing, there is a kind of a bit of a delay which happens. For most customers, this will not be relevant because what we deal with is the concurrency, and for us, every microsecond counts. So for our use case, perhaps that is a limitation, but for the overall market, I do not think that will be a great limitation for them. I'll say that having debugging possibilities can actually help to improvise Chainguard Containers more because as a product, I see a lack of visibility on that. Perhaps I might be wrong. I do not know exactly the way to do it. I am still in the evaluation process. That is one thing. The second thing is that there were no quick fixes available. That is problematic because if you are not able to configure it yourself, you should be able to get those quick fixes right away so that you can continue with your work. You need a detailed discipline if you want to debug those things because it is kind of a mess when you start debugging these containers when they fall. That is why I am still evaluating tools where I can get the balance of both.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Has a good management feature monitored by the cloud service provider."
"The setup was straightforward and it took one hour to deploy."
"Integration and automation are the best features of the solution."
"AKS is easy to use. We can scale up and down as needed with AKS, which saves us money on our cloud costs."
"The Front Door and Service Bus are the most vital features"
"It is easy to maintain the solution."
"We like how easy it is to create the resources in this solution, thanks to how easy the UI is to use."
"We find the container orchestration tool that this solution provides to be very valuable."
"The best feature of Chainguard Containers is being distroless, and the main thing I liked about it is that they follow the SBOM process and the continuous rebuilds they were doing, and they were helping me to rapidly remediate the failures which were happening."
 

Cons

"The initial setup is complex."
"The solution should improve its UI and cost."
"It can be tough to access the servers when onboarding."
"The solution's logs have room for improvement."
"Sometimes, it fails to provide specific metrics."
"AKS has the potential to enhance pricing by enabling us to explore ways to increase cost transparency. However, it's important to note that this refers to computation costs rather than client costs. Our objective is to optimize efficiency and minimize unnecessary expenses. Therefore, we aim to identify which services within the platform can benefit from improved consumption patterns. This is the focus of our ongoing research, with the goal of maximizing computational power within the cluster. We aim to avoid situations where resources are reserved but not utilized effectively. Additionally, our strong emphasis on security ensures that we adhere to all relevant compliance standards, bolstering our overall trustworthiness."
"The costs could be optimized in some way."
"AKS could enhance its functionality by introducing a blueprint feature that streamlines and expedites the process. With a blueprint, users can leverage pre-defined configurations, including some common survey elements, reducing the need for extensive customization and allowing us to focus on our core business activities. Additionally, if the blueprint covers security aspects, it would be greatly beneficial, as it eliminates the need for us to build security expertise from scratch. Currently, we encounter challenges during cloud onboarding, security implementation, and adapting to Kubernetes. Although Microsoft may not consider these as their direct responsibility, providing a blueprint similar to what they offer to developers would be highly advantageous."
"Sometimes there are backend errors which we come across again and again, and there is a resolution, but there are pending tickets for it. That sucks sometimes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is expensive in terms of scalability."
"The control plane is free and we only pay for the usage and time."
"The price of AKS is expensive. We pay approximately $10,000 monthly."
"It is expensive compared to other vendors."
"As you scale your operations, AKS becomes more cost-effective."
"I like the pricing and find it to be in the mid-range, and I would rate it as five out of ten."
"The pricing of the solution is same as Azure Stack."
"The product follows a pay-as-you-go pricing model which is good for small enterprises. You need to pay only for the services that you use."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise22
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)?
The platform's high scalability is one of its biggest advantages.
What needs improvement with Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)?
I am not sure about areas that could be improved.
What is your primary use case for Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)?
I use the product for the environments in the company, specifically for the environments in production, QA, and development. I used it in the finance industry at a bank. Now I have moved to another...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Chainguard Containers?
Currently, we are not paying for it. We are just evaluating right now, but we will get in discussion for that pricing and setup cost. So I cannot comment on that.
What needs improvement with Chainguard Containers?
There are a lot of certain points where I feel that having the functionality of having debugging and ensuring that if I like, I can have the dependence of things where things I felt were lacking. O...
What is your primary use case for Chainguard Containers?
I have been working in my current field for the last five and a half years. I have been evaluating Chainguard Containers for the last three months. I was looking for security and compliance, supply...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, SentinelOne and others in Container Security. Updated: December 2025.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.