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

Cisco CloudCenter [EOL] vs CloudCheckr comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
6.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (10th), Cloud Cost Management (10th), Managed Cloud Services (4th), AI Observability (22nd)
 

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

"You can scale it easily."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup."
"Cisco CloudCenter's scalability is good."
"I can define all components and create a blueprint for consumption across all services."
"The tool is really at the center of our whole digital transformation."
"The solution includes a lot of features and is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports."
"The solution is agile and it has APIs for integration."
"Upgrades are very simple as well because they've allowed us to get updates directly in the CloudCenter Suite manager. If you need to do an upgrade to your setup afterward, you just push a button and it rolls out the parts and retires the old ones. It's seamless and very simple compared to what we've done before."
"CloudCheckr CMx High Security has a lot more detail than the native cloud service cost-management tools."
"The solution is mostly stable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"CloudCheckr has positively impacted our organization as we've cut AWS spend by around 25% over two years."
"I have seen a return on investment of 100%, with significant cost avoidance and measurable savings within the first few months of deployment."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"CloudCheckr has enabled an average cost saving of approximately 25% from the last year, and this occurred while also increasing the scale of production."
"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."
 

Cons

"They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features."
"They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills."
"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."
"We're moving away from it due to the fact that they discontinued the product and introduced something new that does not fit our purpose."
"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."
"You don't get all the solution's benefits if you have older switches."
"The tool should improve its security on the XDR part."
"The product is very expensive."
"The solution must improve its user interface."
"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."
"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."
"Some aspects could be made more customizable, such as the dashboard and UI."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing is expensive."
"The solution is extremely expensive and has additional fees for things like monitoring."
"The tool's pricing is balanced with the market."
"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."
"The cost is on par with other providers."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
912,801 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Media Company
6%
Construction Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
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 ?
The interface could be improved because it is too dense and overloaded with too many charts and too much information on each screen. Latency is also something important to take into account. The da...
What is your primary use case for CloudCheckr ?
My main use case for CloudCheckr is checking the Azure cloud costs of my SaaS service. A specific example of how I use CloudCheckr to check those Azure cloud costs with my SaaS service is that my A...
 

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 Nutanix, Broadcom, IBM and others in Cloud Management. Updated: August 2026.
912,801 professionals have used our research since 2012.