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

Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] vs CloudCheckr 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

Cisco CloudCenter [EOL]
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
CloudCheckr
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (18th), Cloud Cost Management (14th), Managed Cloud Services (6th), AI Observability (26th)
 

Featured Reviews

ZT
Director Of Technology at a non-profit with 11-50 employees
Useful features for configuring down to ports but extremely expensive
Our company uses the solution's GUI interface to configure and monitor ports. We look at usage and determine if there are any issues.  Cisco is a very qualified company and has been in business for many, many years.  The solution is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports.  You…
AbhishekGupta2 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr PreSales Cloud Architect at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
Centralized cloud costs have boosted savings while reporting and user experience still need work
The best features CloudCheckr offers include out-of-the-box security and compliance check features that provide over 35 different types of compliance checks at no cost, best practice checks, and alerts. Another valuable feature is the multi-cloud overview, providing unified reporting across AWS and Azure while allowing us to create different types of dashboards based on who logs into the platform. Additionally, from an MSP standpoint, there is good ease of deployment, especially the billing and chargeback functionality for a reseller or managed services provider. CloudCheckr has positively impacted my organization by helping us manage multiple customers and tens of thousands of resources while retaining performance and visibility due to its multi-cloud support. We do not have to worry about jumping from one platform to another, and the better MSP support is beneficial from a billing and chargeback automation standpoint. The integration in compliance helps identify missing areas within our customer environments and improves them. On average, it has helped us provide approximately 15 to 20% savings through right-sizing or idle resource elimination. These are some of the immediate cost savings our customers have experienced after implementing recommendations from the tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is very, very stable, it doesn't crash or freeze, and it's very reliable."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup."
"Cisco CloudCenter's scalability is good."
"However, for the rest of the solution, the product is doing a great job for what we require."
"The solution includes a lot of features and is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports."
"The solution has a blueprint pattern where you can club multiple machines, define middleware components, define dependencies of components, and create an application pattern for a Java stack that can be consumed across all services using the same TOSCA patterns for CloudCenter, vRealize Automation, and ServiceNow."
"Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very well."
"I can define all components and create a blueprint for consumption across all services."
"CloudCheckr has impacted my organization positively by making things easier and saving time, approximately three hours a week."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"CloudCheckr has positively impacted our organization as we've cut AWS spend by around 25% over two years."
"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."
"CloudCheckr is filled with useful features, that help us learn and to deliver the best recommendations on the data we have."
"The solution is mostly stable."
"Our clients use this to financially optimize their cloud platform, and based on their utilization it helps to decide whether their current platform needs to be optimized and what the ideal form is."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
 

Cons

"The solution needs to be more simple."
"They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills."
"The improvement I would like to see is not one thing particular to CloudCenter. I'd say it's more of a message that the system is still using a lot of the different products and if they would all just fit better together, they all could be faster together."
"I'm not a big fan of CloudCenter. I don't have anything against it, however, the on-premise version has been so hard to upgrade and maintain."
"For many clients, the main problem with the solution is the price. Cisco is very expensive. If they could somehow make the pricing more competitive, that would be a big draw."
"Cisco can improve their product by being agnostic, not just specific to Cisco components but also supportive of other vendors."
"They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features."
"You don't get all the solution's benefits if you have older switches."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."
"CloudCheckr can be very slow sometimes."
"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 solution must improve its user interface."
"What needs to be improved in CloudCheckr CMx High Security is integration."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"Some aspects could be made more customizable, such as the dashboard and UI."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing is expensive."
"The tool's pricing is balanced with the market."
"The solution is extremely expensive and has additional fees for things like monitoring."
"The cost is on par with other providers."
"A license is needed to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security, but because we are a managed service provider, the price of the license would vary. It depends on the type of cloud users we have, for example, it would be some type of percentage or monthly billing, etc."
"The solution is reasonably priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
899,258 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Construction Company
13%
Media Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudCheckr ?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing reflects that it uses custom pricing based on your cloud spend, which is pretty standard for this category. I won't pretend it's cheap, but we'...
What needs improvement with CloudCheckr ?
CloudCheckr could enhance its Azure support, as it honestly feels an afterthought. We have some workloads on Azure and the experience compared to AWS is noticeably worse. Additionally, there's a lo...
What is your primary use case for CloudCheckr ?
A quick, specific example of how I use CloudCheckr in my workflow is that first thing every morning, I check the cost anomaly alerts. CloudCheckr flags anything that looks out of the ordinary overn...
 

Also Known As

CliQr, CliQr CloudCenter
CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NTT, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), CollabNet, Pratt & Miller, PZFlex
Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, Nutanix, IBM and others in Cloud Management. Updated: June 2026.
899,258 professionals have used our research since 2012.