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

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
7.0
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (21st), Cloud Cost Management (11th), Managed Cloud Services (4th), AI Observability (76th)
 

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 solution is agile and it has APIs for integration."
"I can define all components and create a blueprint for consumption across all services."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup."
"The solution includes a lot of features and is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"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."
"Cisco CloudCenter's scalability is good."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The solution is scalable for our purposes."
"CloudCheckr has enabled an average cost saving of approximately 25% from the last year, and this occurred while also increasing the scale of production."
"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."
"The solution is mostly stable."
"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."
"I have seen a return on investment of 100%, with significant cost avoidance and measurable savings within the first few months of deployment."
 

Cons

"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."
"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 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."
"Improvements are needed in UI and multi-tenancy for this solution."
"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."
"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."
"Some aspects could be made more customizable, such as the dashboard and UI."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"I was not satisfied with the customer support from CloudCheckr."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."
"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing is balanced with the market."
"The tool's pricing is expensive."
"The solution is extremely expensive and has additional fees for things like monitoring."
"The solution is reasonably priced."
"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 cost is on par with other providers."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
883,824 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Outsourcing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Legal Firm
5%
 

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 Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about CloudCheckr ?
The recommendation section is pretty helpful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudCheckr ?
Pricing is feature-tiered under the MSP licensing, and I would say the pricing was quite competitive and fair. It was neither inexpensive nor too costly compared to competition, yet it provides goo...
What needs improvement with CloudCheckr ?
Areas where CloudCheckr can be improved include simplifying the user experience, as some areas seem complex to my teammates, who felt overwhelmed by the many dashboards available. Another area is d...
 

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: February 2026.
883,824 professionals have used our research since 2012.