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

Bitdefender GravityZone XDR vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

 

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

Bitdefender GravityZone XDR
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (22nd)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (7th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (1st), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Microsoft Security Suite (8th), Compliance Management (5th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Bitdefender GravityZone XDR is designed for Extended Detection and Response (XDR) and holds a mindshare of 0.9%, up 0.6% compared to last year.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud, on the other hand, focuses on Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP), holds 15.4% mindshare, up 15.4% since last year.
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Bitdefender GravityZone XDR0.9%
CrowdStrike Falcon11.8%
Wazuh9.6%
Other77.7%
Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud15.4%
Wiz15.1%
AWS GuardDuty13.8%
Other55.7%
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Jörg Köhler - PeerSpot reviewer
Setup is smooth and management is seamless, while improvements in email filtering transparency enhance efficiency
For data correlation, we just haven't worked long enough with it to assess its impact on our overall threat response strategy. We prefer a system that simply informs us when there is a problem; we don't want to engage too much in threat hunting. Therefore, we're not looking to create a SOC from this, which is also why we moved from XDR to MDR. There are areas for improvement, including the difficulty in getting the right handles on the applied email filters. It's sometimes unclear why one email is treated as spam and another is not, even if they contain similar content. Making the process of how emails are treated a bit more transparent would be beneficial.
Vibhor Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
A single tool for complete visibility and addressing security gaps
Currently, issues are structured in Microsoft Defender for Cloud at severity levels of high, critical, or warning, but these severity levels are not always right. For example, Microsoft might consider a port being open as critical, but that might not be the case for our company. Similarly, it might suggest closing some management ports, but you might need them to be able to log in, so the severity levels for certain things can be improved. Even though Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a way to temporarily disable certain alerts or notifications without affecting our security score, it would be better to have more granularized control over these recommendations. Currently, we cannot even disable certain alerts or notifications. There should be an automated mechanism to design Azure policies based on the recommendations, possibly with AI integration. Instead of an engineer having to write a policy to fix security gaps, which is very time-consuming, there should be an inbuilt capability to auto-remediate everything and have proper control in place. Additionally, enabling Defender for Cloud at the resource group level, rather than only at the subscription level, would be beneficial.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I find that the auto-response capability is most valuable."
"It provides an in-depth analysis and gives recommendations, along with a historical search capability."
"Scalability is pretty easy. It's easy to increase the capacity. You can just add on licenses to the existing license, and the duration of the license can be adjusted. For example, you've already bought a license for a year, and you want to add some more users. We can just add on licenses for the remaining period so that the entire organization can have the same expiry date. That makes renewal easier."
"I would rate GravityZone XDR more than nine out of ten."
"I appreciate the overall utilization of AI to enhance security posture."
"The solution has an automatic patch management capability."
"The HyperDetect feature in GravityZone XDR is effective."
"The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security."
"The most valuable features offer the latest threat detection and response capabilities."
"The solution is very easy to deploy."
"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."
"One important security feature is the incident alerts. Now, with all these cyberattacks, there are a lot of incident alerts that get triggered. It is very difficult to keep monitoring everything automatically, instead our organization is utilizing the automated use case that we get from Microsoft. That has helped bring down the manual work for a lot of things."
"Defender lets you orchestrate the roll-out from a single pane. Using the Azure portal, you can roll it out over all the servers covered by the entire subscription."
"The most valuable feature is the comprehensive overview across different workloads. It allows us to see protection not just across one workload, such as virtual machines, containers, infrastructure, or data, but across all our workloads. This overall visibility is really helpful."
"The scalability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is very good."
 

Cons

"The resource consumption is high for Bitdefender GravityZone XDR, nearly using one gigabyte of RAM, especially on Windows 10 and 11."
"The product could be improved by offering a single panel for the management of all Bitdefender products."
"Another area of improvement is CPU utilization. CPU utilization could be improved."
"The product could be improved by offering a single panel for the management of all Bitdefender products. Additionally, there might be a need to simplify the interface in the future."
"It's not very mature, and additional costs are involved."
"The resource consumption is high for Bitdefender GravityZone XDR, nearly using one gigabyte of RAM, especially on Windows 10 and 11."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"While we are satisfied with Defender for Cloud's features, an AI enhancement could potentially provide better advice and adapt more effectively to our environment."
"Azure Security Center takes a long time to update, compared to the on-premises version of Microsoft Defender."
"For Kubernetes, I was using Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS). To see that whatever is getting deployed into AKS goes through the correct checks and balances in terms of affinities and other similar aspects and follows all the policies, we had to use a product called Stackrox. At a granular level, the built-in policies were good for Kubernetes, but to protect our containers from a coding point of view, we had to use a few other products. For example, from a programming point of view, we were using Checkmarx for static code analysis. For CIS compliance, there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, we had to use other plugins to see that the CIS benchmarks are compliant. There are CIS benchmarks for Kubernetes on AWS and GCP, but there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, Azure Security Center fell short from the regulatory compliance point of view, and we had to use one more product. We ended up with two different dashboards. We had Azure Security Center, and we had Stackrox that had its own dashboard. The operations team and the security team had to look at two dashboards, and they couldn't get an integrated piece. That's a drawback of Azure Security Center. Azure Security Center should provide APIs so that we can integrate its dashboard within other enterprise dashboards, such as the PowerBI dashboard. We couldn't get through these aspects, and we ended up giving Reader security permission to too many people, which was okay to some extent, but when we had to administer the users for the Stackrox portal and Azure Security Center, it became painful."
"If a customer is already using Okta as an SSO in its entire environment, they will want to continue with it. But Security Center doesn't understand that and keeps making recommendations. It would help if it let us resolve a recommendation, even if it is not implemented."
"There needs to be improvement in the security recommendations, particularly in attack path mapping. Sometimes, it misleads users about the real exposure of external-facing assets."
"I rate Microsoft support five out of 10. It gets better once you're escalated past the first and second levels. It's difficult to get the necessary support when tickets are first opened."
"My experience with Microsoft Defender for Cloud has been largely negative due to a poor user experience."
"Sometimes it's very difficult to determine when I need Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a special resource group or a special kind of product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's not the price of the software itself that makes it expensive. It's because you have to buy a VM; you have to buy additional hardware. All those things make it slightly costlier."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."
"The product's pricing policy is generally favorable."
"Although I am outside of the discussion on budget and costing, I can say that the importance of security provided by this solution is of such importance that whatever the cost is, it is not a factor."
"Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"I'm not privy to that information, but I know it's probably close to a million dollars a year."
"Microsoft's licensing and pricing are sometimes complicated. If someone is new to Microsoft's licensing, they might have difficulty with it."
"Currently, Microsoft offers only one plan at the enterprise level which is $15 per machine."
"The cost is fair. There aren't any costs in addition to the standard licensing fee."
"The licensing cost per server is $15 per month."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Extended Detection and Response (XDR) solutions are best for your needs.
872,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Non Profit
5%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise45
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Bitdefender GravityZone XDR?
Scalability is pretty easy. It's easy to increase the capacity. You can just add on licenses to the existing license, and the duration of the license can be adjusted. For example, you've already b...
What needs improvement with Bitdefender GravityZone XDR?
For data correlation, we just haven't worked long enough with it to assess its impact on our overall threat response strategy. We prefer a system that simply informs us when there is a problem; we ...
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 do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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 CrowdStrike, Microsoft, Trend Micro and others in Extended Detection and Response (XDR). Updated: November 2025.
872,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.