We performed a comparison between CloudCheckr CMx High Security and VMware Aria Operations 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."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 solution is mostly stable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"I have found the reporting tool, capacity planning, and reports for performance monitoring the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features of VMware vRealize Operations (vROps) are capacity and performance management."
"It has allowed us to identify problems sooner and helps us with problems and issues."
"For me, the most valuable feature of vROps is its reporting. We use the reports to send information to certain groups within our company to help forecast the use of resources."
"We appreciate that this solution gives accurate reporting."
"I think vROps is scalable and suitable for our environment."
"The monitoring and verification functionalities were the most useful features."
"It's very easy to use and very stable. Scaling up for future use will be no issue with this solution."
"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 needs to work better with larger capacities of data."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"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."
"For me, the technical support is the biggest problem. I've been working with them since 2016 and in the first years their response was faster than it is today. That is a problem. Also, I need to put together and send them a lot of information. And then I wait one day, two days. The support has been getting worse over the last few years. They need to improve it."
"In the next release, vROps should add integration with Apache OpenStack."
"They need to improve the capacity and infrastructure planning side of things. Also, I would like to see them integrate more stuff, with more detailed monitoring and different cloud providers."
"In the past, when we have raised priority one tickets and they have sent us level one engineers. This wasted time because the L1 was only able to perform the troubleshooting steps that we had already completed."
"The tool is user-friendly, but you need to study to learn about the many features that the tool offers. It is not a tool that you can just start to work with when it comes to capacity planning. You need to study the documentation."
"Lately, the chargeback site has improved, but it could be simpler. You need to create your own dashboards. It should be simple to get a virtual machine and break down the compute and storage costs."
"There are some problems with integration, particularly with Slack, though these have been improved in the latest release."
"If the cost of the license could be cheaper, it would be good."
More CloudCheckr CMx High Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
CloudCheckr CMx High Security is ranked 17th in Cloud Management with 4 reviews while VMware Aria Operations is ranked 2nd in Cloud Management with 39 reviews. CloudCheckr CMx High Security is rated 8.4, while VMware Aria Operations is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CloudCheckr CMx High Security writes "Easy to figure out how to use, has a simple integration, and detects issues and vulnerabilities by priority level". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Aria Operations writes "Easy to use, stable, and support is always available". CloudCheckr CMx High Security is most compared with CloudHealth, Azure Cost Management, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, AWS Trusted Advisor and AWS Cost Management, whereas VMware Aria Operations is most compared with VMware Aria Automation, VMware vSphere, IBM Turbonomic, Veeam ONE and vCenter Orchestrator. See our CloudCheckr CMx High Security vs. VMware Aria Operations report.
See our list of best Cloud Management vendors.
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.
