No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CloudCheckr vs Groundcover Observability Platform 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

CloudCheckr
Ranking in AI Observability
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (9th), Cloud Cost Management (9th), Managed Cloud Services (5th)
Groundcover Observability P...
Ranking in AI Observability
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (47th), Log Management (41st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the AI Observability category, the mindshare of CloudCheckr is 0.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Groundcover Observability Platform is 0.8%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
AI Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
CloudCheckr0.6%
Groundcover Observability Platform0.8%
Other98.6%
AI Observability
 

Featured Reviews

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.
EO
Software Engineer at FairMoney
Centralized observability has improved transaction monitoring and now reduces errors through faster troubleshooting
Groundcover Observability Platform is already very vast, and improving it requires proper training for even a software developer to be able to use it. A person in tech needs training to navigate the system. The UI is better, but it can be improved to include a more intuitive design that easily explains itself to users so that navigation is simpler. Many features are hidden, and you need someone who is experienced with the platform to direct you on how to view certain information or complete specific tasks and walk you through the process. It would be better if Groundcover focused more on simplifying the user interface and improving human-computer interactions of the dashboard to make it so easy for a new developer or specialist to navigate and get what they need quickly. Querying data from Groundcover is not easy if you do not have specific information. You cannot perform a wildcard search in the text box. If you go to the log and enter an error message, it will not bring any results for you. You must first specify the workload or pods you are looking for, then enter the error. You need to add tags and put in your strings to be able to search for your particular logs or errors. If you just put a wildcard search in the text box, it will not work and will appear as if there are no logs that relate to that search, when in reality the logs exist. Making it easier for developers, users, and specialists using Groundcover to navigate and get what they need without the help of an experienced person walking them through is very important. This improvement is not about functionality but more about making navigation easier.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our clients use this to financially optimize their cloud platform, and based on their utilization it helps to decide whether their current platform needs to be optimized and what the ideal form is."
"The only way I have to see the costs is via CloudCheckr."
"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."
"The solution is mostly stable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"CloudCheckr is filled with useful features, that help us learn and to deliver the best recommendations on the data we have."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"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."
"Troubleshooting is very fast compared to manual investigation or using the other forms of logging that we used to have, and downtime and errors have decreased because we are able to see our performance and workload pods performing better, increase CPU and memory resources as soon as usage goes above the threshold, and make our application more scalable and improve performance metrics, reducing the number of errors in the application by at least 70%."
"We switched to Groundcover Observability Platform primarily because of the difficult query syntax in our previous solution, and we chose Groundcover for their business model as they don't charge based on log storage, they provide the infrastructure, and from a security perspective, the data stays in-house, which wasn't the case with our previous tool."
"Groundcover Observability Platform scales effectively with our organization's growth as we add new environments and everything works great, and the migration from our old product went very smoothly, allowing us to deprecate it rather quickly."
"Groundcover Observability Platform has impacted my organization positively as it is the primary way we use observability in our company, so it has a significant impact."
 

Cons

"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."
"What needs to be improved in CloudCheckr CMx High Security is integration."
"CloudCheckr could enhance its Azure support, as it honestly feels an afterthought."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."
"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"I was not satisfied with the customer support from CloudCheckr."
"Querying data from Groundcover is not easy if you do not have specific information."
"I think it would be beneficial to see the body and content of API calls in the traces as a possible improvement."
"I would assess the stability and reliability of Groundcover Observability Platform as an eight out of ten; while I haven't experienced issues personally, I am aware they occasionally encounter some challenges."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is reasonably priced."
"The cost is on par with other providers."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which AI Observability solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Construction Company
37%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudCheckr ?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing reflects that it uses custom pricing based on your cloud spend, which is pretty standard for this category. I won't pretend it's cheap, but we'...
What needs improvement with CloudCheckr ?
The interface could be improved because it is too dense and overloaded with too many charts and too much information on each screen. Latency is also something important to take into account. The da...
What is your primary use case for CloudCheckr ?
My main use case for CloudCheckr is checking the Azure cloud costs of my SaaS service. A specific example of how I use CloudCheckr to check those Azure cloud costs with my SaaS service is that my A...
What needs improvement with Groundcover Observability Platform?
Groundcover Observability Platform is already very vast, and improving it requires proper training for even a software developer to be able to use it. A person in tech needs training to navigate th...
What is your primary use case for Groundcover Observability Platform?
My main use case for Groundcover Observability Platform is for application logs, insights, workload observability, and visibility.
What advice do you have for others considering Groundcover Observability Platform?
Groundcover Observability Platform is a good platform and very good to use. I would rate this review as highly positive.
 

Also Known As

CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about CloudCheckr vs. Groundcover Observability Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.