CloudCheckr vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CloudCheckr and Microsoft Defender for Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed CloudCheckr vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Report (Updated: January 2023).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better.""The initial setup is straightforward.""It will automatically suggest areas for optimization.""The solution is mostly stable.""The solution is scalable for our purposes.""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.""The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use.""The recommendation section is pretty helpful."

More CloudCheckr Pros →

"It isn't a highly complex solution. It's something that a lot of analysts can use. Defender gives you a broad overview of what's happening in your environment, and it's a great solution if you're a Microsoft shop.""The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents.""The security alerts and correlated alerts are most valuable. It correlates the logs and gives us correlated alerts, which can be fed into any security information and event management (SIEM) tool. It is an analyzed correlation tool for monitoring security. It gives us alerts when there is any kind of unauthorized access, or when there is any malfunctioning in multifactor authentication (MFA). If our Azure is connected with Azure Security Center, we get to know what types of authentication are happening in our infra.""DSPM is the most valuable feature.""We can create alerts that trigger if there is any malicious activity happening in the workflow and these alerts can be retrieved using the query language.""One important security feature is the incident alerts. Now, with all these cyberattacks, there are a lot of incident alerts that get triggered. It is very difficult to keep monitoring everything automatically, instead our organization is utilizing the automated use case that we get from Microsoft. That has helped bring down the manual work for a lot of things.""It takes very little effort to integrate it. It also gives very good visibility into what exactly is happening.""Technical support is helpful."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Pros →

Cons
"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited.""The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data.""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.""The performance of the tool really needs to be improved.""Many features still need to be implemented in this tool.""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.""Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."

More CloudCheckr Cons →

"There is no perfect product in the world and there are always features that can be added.""After getting a recommendation, it takes time for the solution to refresh properly to show that the problem has been eliminated.""The documentation and implementation guides could be improved.""Microsoft sources most of their threat intelligence internally, but I think they should open themselves up to bodies that provide feel intelligence to build a better engine. There may be threats out there that they don't report because their team is not doing anything on that and they don't have arrangements with another party that is involved in that research.""Most of the time, when we log into the support, we don't get a chance to interact with Microsoft employees directly, except having it go to outsource employees of Microsoft. The initial interaction has not been that great because outsourced companies cannot provide the kind of quality or technical expertise that we look for. We have a technical manager from Microsoft, but they are kind of average unless we make noise and ask them to escalate. We then can get the right people and the right solution, but it definitely takes time.""When you work with it, the only problem that we're struggling with is that we have 21 different subscriptions we're trying to apply security to. It's impossible to keep everything organized.""Another thing is that Defender for Cloud uses more resources than CrowdStrike, which my current company uses. Defender for Cloud has two or three processes running simultaneously that consume memory and processor time. I had the chance to compare that with CrowdStrike a few days ago, which was significantly less. It would be nice if Defender were a little lighter. It's a relatively large installation that consumes more resources than competitors do.""The solution could improve by being more intuitive and easier to use requiring less technical knowledge."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "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."
  • More CloudCheckr Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "I'm not privy to that information, but I know it's probably close to a million dollars a year."
  • "We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."
  • "Azure Defender is a bit pricey. The price could be lower."
  • "This is a worldwide service and depending on the country, there will be different prices."
  • "Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."
  • "There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."
  • "Its pricing is a little bit high in terms of Azure Security Center, but the good thing is that we don't need to maintain and deploy it. So, while the pricing is high, it is native to Azure which is why we prefer using this tool."
  • "I am not involved in this area. However, I believe its price is okay because even small customers are using Azure Security Center. I don't think it is very expensive."
  • More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The recommendation section is pretty helpful.
    Top Answer:The price depends on the actual Azure consumption and what we feed into it. The cost is on par with other providers.
    Top Answer:We are not happy with the product’s reporting capabilities. We are planning to change the solution. The security compliance feature doesn’t give much data because CloudCheckr has done a majority of… more »
    Top Answer:Azure Security Center is very easy to use, integrates well, and gives very good visibility on what is happening across your ecosystem. It also has great remote workforce capabilities and supports a… more »
    Top Answer:The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
    Top Answer:Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Microsoft needs to bring the cost down. What we're doing to their detriment is simply lowering the amount of log retention we're… more »
    Ranking
    23rd
    out of 75 in Cloud Management
    Views
    740
    Comparisons
    539
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    543
    Rating
    8.7
    Views
    16,509
    Comparisons
    12,378
    Reviews
    21
    Average Words per Review
    1,043
    Rating
    7.9
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP
    Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
    Learn More
    Interactive Demo
    Overview
    CloudCheckr CMx High Security is a cloud management platform that provides complete visibility into cost and security issues. The primary use cases are day-to-day operations, cloud management, identifying open vulnerabilities and issues from a security perspective, and cost management and optimization. 

    The solution is praised for its stability, simplicity, ease of use, scalability, excellent technical support, and granular reporting. CloudCheckr CMx High Security provides priority-level data on security issues and vulnerabilities, making it easy to identify critical issues that need immediate attention.

    Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a comprehensive security solution that provides advanced threat protection for cloud workloads. It offers real-time visibility into the security posture of cloud environments, enabling organizations to quickly identify and respond to potential threats. With its advanced machine learning capabilities, Microsoft Defender for Cloud can detect and block sophisticated attacks, including zero-day exploits and fileless malware.

    The solution also provides automated remediation capabilities, allowing security teams to quickly and easily respond to security incidents. With Microsoft Defender for Cloud, organizations can ensure the security and compliance of their cloud workloads, while reducing the burden on their security teams.

    Sample Customers
    Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility
    Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company20%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    Retailer11%
    Government9%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company24%
    Consumer Goods Company10%
    Recruiting/Hr Firm10%
    Agriculture10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company17%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise63%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise65%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business27%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise62%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise65%
    Buyer's Guide
    CloudCheckr vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud
    January 2023
    Find out what your peers are saying about CloudCheckr vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: January 2023.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    CloudCheckr is ranked 23rd in Cloud Management with 8 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 2nd in CWPP (Cloud Workload Protection Platforms) with 46 reviews. CloudCheckr is rated 7.6, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CloudCheckr writes "Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". CloudCheckr is most compared with AWS Trusted Advisor, Azure Cost Management, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, Apptio One and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender XDR, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Sentinel and Wiz. See our CloudCheckr vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud report.

    We monitor all Cloud Management 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.