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

Claroty Platform vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

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

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
18th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (2nd)
Claroty Platform
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
17th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Remote Access (8th), Operational Technology (OT) Security (2nd), Cyber-Physical Systems Protection (2nd)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Container Management (9th), Container Security (6th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.7%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Claroty Platform is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 5.7%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
Deevanshi Priya - PeerSpot reviewer
Achieve certifications with progress tracking and potential for enhanced interactivity
I was using Claroty to complete training assigned by my company. The courses were self-paced and helped me get certified in two additional certifications. I plan to use it further as I have a task list for future courses. It was primarily for certification and study materials The feature I like…
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

"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"We saw benefits from Zafran Security almost immediately after deploying it."
"Overall, we have seen about eighty-seven percent reduction of the number of vulnerabilities that require urgency to remediate, specifically the number of criticals."
"Their SRA solution, the Secure Remote Access solution, is very useful for industrial environments."
"Claroty provides continuous threat protection and identifies pre-empty stuff and false positives."
"I believe the two main aspects where Claroty stands out are their ability to provide a complete platform and their OT-specific focus."
"Claroty is very beneficial for learning and adds value to your resume."
"I appreciate the active coding, deep inspection of packages, and data retrieval. The tool covers information about assets and attack vectors, which I find superior to other tools. Based on alerts, I create reports detailing how an attacker can penetrate the plant, both externally and internally."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the map, which shows everything that is connected and communicates with each other."
"I have had a very good experience with the Claroty Platform."
"The platform ensures security without imposing significant delays."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"The main feature is the security posture assessment through the security score. I find that to be very helpful because it gives us guidance on what needs to be secured and recommendations on how to secure the workloads that have been onboarded."
"I have not experienced any difficulties or issues with the stability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"Defender for Cloud is an improvement over Trend Micro, our previous solution. We like integrating our endpoints and visualizing everything in one place. It provides comprehensive coverage for endpoints, servers, and overall environmental security."
"The first valuable feature was the fact that it gave us a list of everything that users were surfing on the web. Having the list, we could make decisions about those sites."
"The most valuable feature is the hunting feature, which integrates well into the entire Microsoft ecosystem."
"The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security."
"The pricing is good."
 

Cons

"I think the ability to have some enhanced reporting capabilities is something they can improve on, as they have good reports but we have asked for some specific reporting enhancements."
"The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvements."
"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."
"There are a few protocols that Claroty doesn't currently support."
"If more AI features could be included with the Clarity solution, it would be feasible for everybody."
"The Claroty Platform becomes too noisy when it gives numerous CVEs related to vendor match. Sometimes, these CVEs are not actually related to the device in the firmware at the site."
"The product could be improved in terms of user interface design."
"The graphical user interface is quite poor."
"For improvement, I think the training could be more practical. We have external training, but they're mostly theoretical. I want the solution to provide hands-on lab experience to help users learn better."
"I've reported four bugs and three feature requests so far. The main area of focus should be on how attacks are detected. The attack vector information needs to be more detailed. For example, it's not enough to state that an SMB v1 version open can lead to a WannaCry attack. A more detailed explanation should help clients understand the various ways an attack could occur."
"Introducing an AI chatbot to assist you when you have doubts could be beneficial."
"However, some Copilot features aren't available in the GCP environment. This is something we hope will be addressed in the future."
"If they had an easier way to display all the vulnerabilities of the machines affected and remediation steps on one screen rather than having to dive deep into each of them, that would be a lot easier."
"There are challenges with the licensing policies, which are quite complicated."
"It's hard to reach someone who understands my problems. I haven't had many issues, so I haven't called them."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is not compatible with Linux machines."
"I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a six out of 10 due to its lack of necessary features to operate as a standalone solution."
"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."
"The overview provides you with good information, but if you want more details, there is a lot more customization to do, which requires knowledge of the other supporting solutions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The tool is quite expensive."
"It's a bit expensive compared to other solutions."
"The licensing for physical devices is cheap, but the software version is expensive. The software version costs around 26-28 dollars. I was surprised and even double-checked. It was shocking."
"The pricing model for most plans is generally good, but the cost of the new Defender for Storage plan is high and should be revisited, as it could lead to disabling desirable security features due to cost."
"We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters."
"The tool is pretty expensive."
"Defender's basic version is free, which is good. Many of our teams are evaluating the paid version against third-party products."
"The licensing cost per server is $15 per month."
"Pricing depends on your workload size, but it is very cheap. If you're talking about virtual machines, it is $5 or something for each machine, which is minimal. If you go for some agent-based solution for every virtual machine, then you need to pay the same thing or more than that. For an on-premises solution like this, we were paying around $30 to $50 based on size. With Defender, Microsoft doesn't bother about the size. You pay based on the number of machines. So, if you have 10 virtual machines, and 10 virtual machines are being monitored, you are paying based on that rather than the size of the virtual machine. Thus, you are paying for the number of units rather than paying for the size of your units."
"It is bundled with our enterprise subscription, which makes it easy to go for it. It is available by default, and there is no extra cost for using the standard features."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
859,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
5%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
The current pricing of Zafran Security is fair overall. They were good to work with to accommodate our organization w...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvement...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
Zafran Security is helping reduce the amount of critical vulnerabilities in our environments that require prompt reme...
Which solution do you prefer: Nozomi Networks or Claroty Platform?
Nozomi Networks and Claroty Platform are both leading operational technology (OT) security solutions offering a wide ...
What do you like most about Claroty Platform?
The product helps mitigate potential threats, especially if its users have signature rules. The product also provides...
What needs improvement with Claroty Platform?
Regarding the cons of the Claroty Platform, it is not about the deployment, but rather the identification. The Clarot...
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 acros...
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
No data available
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Rockwell Automation
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 Claroty Platform vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.