Cisco Secure Workload vs SUSE NeuVector comparison

Cisco and SUSE are both solutions in the Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) category. Cisco is ranked #16 with an average rating of 9.5, while SUSE is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.5. Cisco holds a 2.2% mindshare in CWPP, compared to SUSE’s 1.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of SUSE users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Cisco Secure Workload and SUSE NeuVector compete in the workload security space, with NeuVector often favored for its functionality due to its comprehensive features, while Cisco Secure Workload is noted for its cost efficiency and support.

Features: Cisco Secure Workload is noted for its robust threat detection, effective segmentation, and accessible customer service. SUSE NeuVector stands out with its automation capabilities, real-time threat assessment, and focus on Kubernetes-native security.

Room for Improvement: Cisco Secure Workload could enhance user support for integration, simplify deployment processes, and expand its feature set. SUSE NeuVector may require improvements in reporting tools, dashboard functionalities, and could benefit from increased customer support responsiveness.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco Secure Workload is characterized by straightforward deployment and reliable support. SUSE NeuVector's deployment is flexible but sometimes hindered by slow customer service response times.

Pricing and ROI: Cisco Secure Workload offers competitive pricing and favorable ROI, while SUSE NeuVector, despite a higher initial cost, provides excellent ROI in Kubernetes environments due to its feature set.

To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Secure Workload vs. SUSE NeuVector Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Workload vs. SUSE NeuVector

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 893,438 peers since 2012

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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 4.9%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Workload is 2.2%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 1.1%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security	4.9%
Cisco Secure Workload	2.2%
SUSE NeuVector	1.1%
Other	91.8%

Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)

Featured Reviews

Sreeraj Mohandas

Security Engineer at HashXpert

Consolidated cloud security has reduced manual work and has automated vulnerability remediation

I elaborate on my rating of SentinelOne support by mentioning that there was some time where the troubleshooting took a longer time. In fact, there were many meetings going on. The availability of the document on the internet is on a lesser side because as an engineer, I would want to know about the troubleshooting aspects of this particular tool. When I am facing a customer, I do not prefer to bring the vendor to every call and try to resolve it, as it takes months and months. It would be better to have a training session with the engineer on site to explain and train properly. This is not the case with SentinelOne, so this is the only thing I have a complaint about. I do not have any other room for improvement to suggest within SentinelOne itself. However, I would really want the AI assistant for the threat hunting part to be more accessible. They have it, but they are making it licensed, so it is a bit on the higher end.

Read full review

Raj Metkar

Director, Head of Networks at MUFG, EMEA

Discover internal application dependencies and create a dependency map

We actively seek improvements in integrating the Infoblox DDI platform with Cisco Secure Workload. This integration allows Cisco Secure Workload to learn about our networks and network tags, providing valuable insights into vulnerabilities related to the operating system and various applications installed on our servers. Recently, Cisco announced a new product called HyperShield, an AI-based autonomous micro-segmentation solution. While Cisco has not stated that HyperShield will replace Cisco Secure Workload, it represents a natural evolution for the company. HyperShield features dynamic policy discovery and enforcement; however, once policies are enforced, they do not change until a discovery occurs, requiring a re-enforcement process. This new platform operates autonomously, minimizing the need for user or security engineer intervention. I would have expected Cisco to incorporate more automatic discovery and enforcement features within the existing Cisco Secure Workload product. Instead of enhancing the current product, they have introduced a new solution. Cisco plans to honor existing Tetration licenses, allowing users to transition to HyperShield without additional costs, reflecting the investment enterprises have already made. From Cisco’s perspective, this represents a natural progression in their product line. While the product name changes, it seems more of a rebranding effort. The enhancements are greater autonomy, improved discovery, and automatic enforcement, which are now being introduced in HyperShield. Cisco Secure Workload offers automatic policy enforcement but cannot adjust policies dynamically as the application needs to change. Having used the platform for the past five years, the recent announcement has been reassuring. Cisco has confirmed that our investment in the platform will not go to waste. They will honor our existing licenses, providing a natural migration path to the new solution without any disruption

Read full review

Danie Joubert

Managing Director at ProQuanta

Performs well, multiple deployment methods, and helpful support

The scalability of the solution is highly commendable, making it a compelling reason to consider incorporating new features. Its ability to scale efficiently, coupled with its multitude of clusters, reinforces the need for exploring additional functionalities. Most of our clients are enterprise-level. I rate the scalability of SUSE NeuVector a nine out of ten.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is very straightforward. It is not complicated. For the information that it provides, it does a pretty good job."

"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."

"The monitoring tool has comprehensive monitoring features."

"As a frequently audited company, we value SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's compliance monitoring features. They give us a report with a compliance score for how well we meet certain regulatory standards, like HIPAA. We can show our compliance as a percentage. It's also a way to show that we are serious about security."

"Cloud Native Security helps us discover vulnerabilities in a cloud environment like open ports that allow people to attack our environment. If someone unintentionally opens a port, we are exposed. Cloud Native Security alerts us so we can remediate the problem. We can also automate it so that Cloud Native Security will fix it."

"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security released a new security graph tool that helps us identify the root issue. Other tools give you a pass/fail type of profile on all misconfigurations, and those will run into the thousands. SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's graphing algorithm connects various components together and tries to identify what is severe and what is not. It can correlate various vulnerabilities and datasets to test them on the back end to pinpoint the real issue."

"The visibility provided by SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security around infrastructure was very valuable."

"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security drastically reduces the mean time to remediate for cloud incidents by shrinking investigation and response time from hours to seconds or minutes."

More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security pros

"The only use case I can see that makes sense is micro-segmentation. I think there are other use cases for it. The main purpose of the product is to do micro-segmentation by collecting IP. That could be done by installing an agent, and then you have all the communication coming in and out. You could also use some flow sensors installed in the network that receive a copy of the traffic and then report that back to the system."

"Overall, this is a really good product and I am happy with it."

"Scalability is its most valuable feature."

"The most valuable feature is micro-segmentation, which is the most important with respect to visibility."

"The product offers great visibility into the network so we can enforce security measures."

"Secure Workload's best feature is that it's an end-to-end offering from Cisco."

"It's stable."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don't have to do packet captures on the network."

More Cisco Secure Workload pros

"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."

"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."

"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."

"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."

"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."

"The UI has a lot of features."

"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."

More SUSE NeuVector pros

Cons

"We've found a lot of false positives."

"Customized queries should be made easier to improve SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security."

"One potential drawback is the cost of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security, which may be prohibitive for smaller businesses or startups, particularly those in regions with lower average incomes, such as India."

"The SentinelOne customer support needs improvement, as they are sometimes late in responding, which is critical in a production issue."

"There is one concern related to SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security platform. They claim it as an AI-based integration that will provide runtime protection."

"I have not seen a return on my investment so far."

"Currently, we would have to export our vulnerability report to an .xlsx file, and review it in an Excel spreadsheet, and then we sort of compile a list from there. It would be cool if there was a way to actually toggle multiple applications for review and then see those file paths on multiple users rather than only one user at a time or only one application at a time."

"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."

More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security cons

"Secure Workload is a little complicated to use, and the dashboard isn't intuitive, so it takes a while to learn how to use it."

"The interface is really helpful for technical people, but it is not user-friendly."

"The multi-tenancy, redundancy, backup and restore functionalities, as well as the monitoring aspects of the solution, need improvement."

"The problem is that we can only deploy the particular solution where we have the hardware with Cisco."

"The integration could be better, especially with different types of solutions."

"The product must be integrated with the cloud."

"Cisco Tetration needs more flags and system alerts that we should get with network capture."

More Cisco Secure Workload cons

"However, I found that the support in Egypt was not very qualified, and there was a need to upgrade to a higher support layer to solve my issues."

"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."

"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."

"The documentation needs to improve a bit."

"Using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features between two clusters and could be improved."

"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."

"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."

More SUSE NeuVector cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a little expensive. I would rate it a four out of ten for pricing."

"PingSafe is priced reasonably for our workload."

"I would rate the cost a seven out of ten with ten being the most costly."

"I am personally not taking care of the pricing part, but when we moved from CrowdStrike to PingSafe, there were some savings. The price of CrowdStrike was quite high. Compared to that, the price of PingSafe was low. PingSafe is charging based on the subscription model. If I want to add an AWS subscription, I need to pay more. It should not be based on subscription. It should be based on the number of servers that I am scanning."

"We have an enterprise license. It is affordable. I'm not sure, but I think we pay 150,000 rupees per month."

"PingSafe is not very expensive compared to Prisma Cloud, but it's also not that cheap. However, because of its features, it makes sense to us as a company. It's fairly priced."

"It's a fair price for what you get. We are happy with the price as it stands."

"SentinelOne is relatively cheap. If ten is the most expensive, I would rate it a seven."

More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security pricing and cost advice

"Regarding price, Cisco Secure Workload can be expensive if you don't have a budget. If you're not doing micro-segmentation, every extra security measure or enforcement you're putting on top of your existing environment will be an extra cost. It's not a cheap solution at all. But from my point of view, if you need to do micro-segmentation, this is one of the best tools I've seen for it. I can't compare that to Microsoft's solution because I haven't looked into it. I've looked into VMware and Cisco. Those are the only two that I know of. I didn't know that Microsoft could do micro-segmentation at all. Maybe they can, but I haven't heard anything about it."

"Pricing depends on the scope of the application and the features. Larger installations save more."

"The pricing is a bit higher than we anticipated."

"The cost for the hardware is around 300k."

"The price is based on how many computers you're going to install it on."

"The price is outrageous. If you have money to throw at the product, then do it."

"It is not cheap and pricing may limit scalability."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."

"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."

"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	51
Midsize Enterprise	23
Large Enterprise	59

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?

The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is that the pric...

See all answers

What needs improvement with PingSafe?

Integration could be improved because not all solutions can be integrated with SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Workload?

CloudStrike offers antivirus capabilities and firewall features for servers and VDI but lacks automatic policy discov...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Workload?

We actively seek improvements in integrating the Infoblox DDI platform with Cisco Secure Workload. This integration a...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Workload?

When we onboarded Cisco Secure Workload, the usual use case was to discover internal application dependencies and cre...

See all answers

What needs improvement with NeuVector?

One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node por...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for NeuVector?

In my company, I am looking to deploy a container security runtime solution.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering NeuVector?

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

See all answers

Comparisons

Wiz vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 8% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 6% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 5% of the time

FortiCNAPP vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

Compared 4% of the time

More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Competitors

Illumio vs Cisco Secure Workload

Compared 15% of the time

Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Cisco Secure Workload

Compared 13% of the time

VMware NSX vs Cisco Secure Workload

Compared 9% of the time

Cisco Hypershield vs Cisco Secure Workload

Compared 7% of the time

TrendAI Deep Security vs Cisco Secure Workload

Compared 6% of the time

More Cisco Secure Workload Competitors

Trivy vs SUSE NeuVector

Compared 10% of the time

Sysdig Falco vs SUSE NeuVector

Compared 9% of the time

Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs SUSE NeuVector

Compared 7% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security vs SUSE NeuVector

Compared 5% of the time

More SUSE NeuVector Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security

April 2026

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security report

Download SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security product report

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Workload

May 2026

Download Cisco Secure Workload product report

Buyer's Guide

Container Security

May 2026

Download SUSE NeuVector product report

Also Known As

PingSafe

Cisco Tetration

NeuVector

Overview

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers a streamlined approach to cloud security with intuitive operation and strong integration capabilities for heightened threat detection and remediation efficiency.

Singularity Cloud Security stands out for its real-time detection and response, effectively minimizing detection and remediation timelines. Its automated remediation integrates smoothly with third-party tools enhancing operational efficiency. The comprehensive console ensures visibility and support for forensic investigations. Seamless platform integration and robust support for innovation are notable advantages. Areas for development include improved search functionality, affordability, better firewall capabilities for remote users, stable agents, comprehensive reporting, and efficient third-party integrations. Clarity in the interface, responsive support, and real-time alerting need enhancement, with a call for more automation and customization. Better scalability and cost-effective integration without compromising capabilities are desired.

What are SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's standout features?

Ease of Use: Intuitive operation simplifies navigation across platforms.
Real-Time Detection: Quick identification and response to threats.
Automated Remediation: Streamlines recovery processes with integration capabilities.
Forensic Visibility: Aids in thorough threat analysis and prevention strategies.
Comprehensive Console: Offers full visibility and historical data tracking.
Platform Integration: Supports seamless operation across cloud and hybrid environments.

What benefits should users expect from SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security?

Enhanced Efficiency: Automation and third-party integration improve threat response.
Improved Detection: Reduces mean time to detect and respond to threats.
Operational Support: Comprehensive visibility and forensic tools aid operational decisions.
Cost Efficiency: Affordable integration with scaling capabilities without high overhead.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is deployed in industries needing robust cloud security posture management, endpoint protection, and threat hunting. Utilized frequently across AWS and Azure, it assists in monitoring, threat detection, and maintaining compliance in diverse environments while providing real-time alerts and recommendations for proactive threat management.

SentinelOne

Cisco Secure Workload offers advanced auditing, micro-segmentation, and network visibility, automating policy presentation for improved security. It enhances application dependency mapping and provides comprehensive telemetry with strategic policy enforcement.

Cisco Secure Workload specializes in automating micro-segmentation, data center management, and traffic analysis. Its capabilities facilitate application dependency mapping and enhance internal micro-segmentation, providing invaluable network visibility. Users find its automation in policy presentation and strategic enforcement beneficial, along with granular control and scalability, despite needing improvements in scalability and integration capabilities. Enhanced notification features, troubleshooting options, and an efficient interface are desired for seamless deployment, along with stronger multi-tenancy, redundancy, and monitoring functions. Broader platform support and integrated cloud connectivity are desired for unified management across tools.

What are the most important features?

Auditing: Provides in-depth network analysis and security auditing capabilities.
Micro-Segmentation: Enhances network security by automating segmentation at a granular level.
Application Dependency Mapping: Visualizes connections and interactions between applications.
Network Visibility: Delivers comprehensive insight into network activities and dynamics.
Policy Discovery: Streamlines policy creation through automation and reduces manual intervention.
Comprehensive Telemetry: Offers complete coverage and insights for better security assessment.

What benefits and ROI should be evaluated?

Enhanced Security Measures: Offers robust features for network security improvement.
Automated Processes: Reduces manual efforts through automation, increasing efficiency.
Scalability: Adapts to growing network demands with flexible scalability options.
Granular Control: Allows detailed control over network policies and enforcement.

Entities in finance, gas, and oil sectors utilize Cisco Secure Workload for networking site management and compliance maintenance. It integrates into extensive Cisco infrastructure, aiding routers, switches, and endpoints, thus supporting auditors in network synchronization and auditing needs.

Cisco

SUSE NeuVector offers robust container security with features like image scanning, anti-malware, deployment simplicity, and run-time security. It enhances risk management and performance across container, client, node, network security, and vulnerability scanning.

SUSE NeuVector is designed for comprehensive Kubernetes and container security, handling vulnerability management, and simplifying deployment in hybrid environments. It integrates with CI/CD pipelines and supports multiple clusters, providing flexibility for cloud and on-premise implementations. The platform enhances compliance with automation and informative interfaces, aiding in ISO certification checks. While it excels in various security aspects, there are areas for improvement including image scanning and integration with other tools. Users need enhanced visibility into DevSecOps and better support for IaaS VMs, alongside improved documentation and monitoring capabilities.

What are the key features of SUSE NeuVector?

Image Scanning: Identifies vulnerabilities in container images to ensure policy satisfaction.
Run-time Security: Protects container workloads with network behavior automation.
CI/CD Integration: Seamlessly integrates into existing pipelines like GitLab.
Multi-Cluster Support: Manages security across clusters efficiently.
Advanced Learning Automation: Enhances security with intelligent automation and machine learning.

What benefits can users expect from SUSE NeuVector?

Risk Management: Enhances security for container environments, mitigating potential threats.
Cost-Effectiveness: Offers economical solutions for robust container security.
Performance Improvement: Boosts security efficiency with streamlined processes.
Compliance Enhancement: Supports ISO checks and policy compliance, ensuring standards are met.
Flexibility: Adapts to cloud and on-premise setups, providing varied deployment options.

Industries implement SUSE NeuVector to fortify container security within Kubernetes ecosystems. Often used in conjunction with Amazon AWS, it monitors events and manages vulnerabilities to protect assets. It finds application in sectors where security runtime solutions and network automation are crucial, catering to both cloud-based and on-premise needs. Its integration capabilities with CI/CD pipelines support agile software development across different industries.

SUSE

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

ADP, University of North Carolina Charlotte (UNCC)

Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Workload vs. SUSE NeuVector

April 2026

Free Report: Cisco Secure Workload vs. SUSE NeuVector

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Workload vs. SUSE NeuVector and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cisco Secure Workload vs. SUSE NeuVector report.

See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.