CloudCheckr vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

Spot - A Flexera company and IBM are both solutions in the Cloud Management category. Spot - A Flexera company is ranked #28 with an average rating of 6.0, while IBM is ranked #5 with an average rating of 9.0. Spot - A Flexera company holds a 1.3% mindshare in CM, compared to IBM’s 4.9% mindshare. Additionally, 66% of Spot - A Flexera company users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 98% of IBM users who would recommend it.

CloudCheckr

Read 8 CloudCheckr reviews

924 Views
444 Comparison Views

66% willing to recommend

IBM Turbonomic

Read 205 IBM Turbonomic reviews

5,574 Views
3,010 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

CloudCheckr

IBM Turbonomic

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

IBM Turbonomic and CloudCheckr are notable players in the cloud and IT optimization category. IBM Turbonomic holds the advantage due to its focus on automation, forecasting, and resource utilization enhancement, while CloudCheckr excels in cost management and reporting.

Features: IBM Turbonomic offers automation, real-time optimization, and scenario planning, highly regarded for its data-driven forecasting and VM rightsizing capabilities. It facilitates automated resource balancing, thus improving efficiency and utilization. CloudCheckr is known for its intuitive user interface, extensive cost management features, and detailed reporting and billing tools.

Room for Improvement: IBM Turbonomic users expect a more user-friendly interface, specifically requesting an HTML5 update, and enhanced reporting customization for easier configuration. CloudCheckr users report performance issues during large data processing and desire improved integration with non-AWS platforms. Both products could benefit from refining user interaction and reporting features to align with diverse user requirements.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM Turbonomic is praised for straightforward deployment in on-premises environments and responsive customer service that engages proactively. In contrast, CloudCheckr is noted for strong service within public cloud environments, though some users highlight concerns over response times and complexity in matching Turbonomic's efficacy.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Turbonomic is appreciated for delivering a significant return on investment, particularly within large enterprises, through resource optimization and reduced cloud spending. Its pricing structure supports quick ROI achievement. CloudCheckr's pricing is competitive, aligning with peers, but lacks notable mentions of ROI in reviews, focusing instead on its affordability.

To learn more, read our detailed CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 871,408 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

CloudCheckr

Ranking in Cloud Management

28th

Ranking in Cloud Cost Management

11th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed Cloud Services (7th)

IBM Turbonomic

Ranking in Cloud Management

5th

Ranking in Cloud Cost Management

1st

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

205

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Migration (7th), Virtualization Management Tools (4th), IT Financial Management (1st), IT Operations Analytics (4th), Cloud Analytics (1st), AIOps (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Cloud Management category, the mindshare of CloudCheckr is 1.3%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 4.9%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Management Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
IBM Turbonomic	4.9%
CloudCheckr	1.3%
Other	93.8%

Cloud Management

Featured Reviews

Peter Ramnath

Associate Director, ITSM & Onboarding at a computer software company with 201-500 employees

Provides recommendations regarding how cost and consumption can be adjusted, but the reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited

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 its development on AWS. The majority of our clients are on Microsoft Azure. There are a lot of features and information available for Amazon, but not for Azure. The tool wasn't meeting our expectations. The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited. There's no ability to do scheduled email reports. The report could only be sent to a single email address. The tool was not very usable. We had multiple clients and tasks to work with.

Read full review

Dan Ambrose

Infrastructure Engineer 4 at Hyland

Helps visibility, bridges the data gap, and frees up time

We use IBM Turbonomic in a hybrid cloud environment. Although it supports multi-cloud capabilities, we currently operate in a single-cloud setting. Turbonomic offers visibility into our environment's performance, spanning across applications, underlying infrastructure, and protection resources. The visibility and analytics help to bridge the data gap between disparate IT teams such as applications and infrastructure. This is important for awareness collaboration, cost saving, and helping to design and improve our application. Enhanced visibility and data analytics have contributed to a significant reduction in our mean time to resolve. Tools like Turbonomic provide crucial visualization and insights, empowering us to make data-driven decisions instead of relying on assumptions as we did before. This newfound transparency translates to a massive improvement, going from complete darkness to having a clear 100 percent view of the situation. Although our applications are not optimized for the cloud we have seen some improvement in response time. IBM Turbonomic empowers us to achieve more with fewer people thanks to automation. Previously, customers frequently contacted us requesting resource increases to resolve issues. Now, we have a tool that allows us to objectively assess their needs, leading to a deeper understanding of our applications. This solution also generates significant cost savings in the cloud and optimizes hardware utilization within our data centers. Its AI algorithm intelligently allocates servers on hosts, maximizing efficiency without compromising performance. By fine-tuning resource allocation without causing performance bottlenecks, Turbonomic extends the lifespan of existing hardware, postponing the need for new purchases. This effectively stretches our capital expenditure budget. We started to see the benefits of IBM Turbonomic within the first 60 days. IBM is a fantastic partner. Their tech support has been outstanding, and the product itself is excellent - a very solid offering. By automating resource management with Turbonomic, our engineers are freed up to focus on more strategic initiatives like innovation and ongoing organizational projects. Previously, manually adding resources was a time-consuming process that interrupted workflows. Now, automation handles scaling efficiently, saving us thousands of man-hours and significant costs. It has illuminated the need for SetOps. It has highlighted areas of overspending, and the actions we've taken have demonstrated significant cost savings. IBM Turbonomic has positively impacted our overall application performance. IBM Turbonomic has helped reduce both CAPEX and OPEX. It has also significantly reduced cloud build times.

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

"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."

"The solution is mostly stable."

"The initial setup is straightforward."

"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."

"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."

"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."

"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."

"The solution is scalable for our purposes."

"The biggest value I'm getting out of VMTurbo right now is the complete hands-off management of equalizing the usage in my data center."

"We have a system where our developers automate machine builds, and that is constantly running out of resources. Turbonomic helps us with that, so I don't have to keep buying hardware. The developers always say, "They don't have enough. They don't have enough. They don't have enough," when they just configured it improperly. Therefore, Turbonomic helps us identify configuration issues on their side so it doesn't cost me money on the other end to buy resources that I don't really need."

"I only deal with the infrastructure side, so I really couldn't speak to more than load balancing as the most valuable feature for me. It provides specific actions that prevent resource starvation. It always keeps things in perfect balance."

"The ability to monitor and automate both the right-sizing of VMs as well as to automate the vMotion of VMs across ESXi hosts."

"It also brings up a list of machines and if something is under-provisioned and needs more compute power it will tell you, 'This server needs more compute power, and we suggest you raise it up to this level.' It will even automatically do it for you. In Azure, you don't have to actually go into the cloud provider to resize. You can just say, 'Apply these resizes,' and Turbonomic uses some back-end APIs to make the changes for you."

"My favorite part of the solution is the automation scheduling. Being able to choose when actions happen, and how they happen..."

"With Turbonomic, we were able to reduce our ESX cluster size and save money on our maintenance and license renewals. It saved us around $75,000 per year but it's a one-time reduction in VMware licensing. We don't renew the support. The ongoing savings is probably $50,000 to $75,000 a year, but there was a one-time of $200,000 plus."

"The tool provides the ability to look at the consumption utilization over a period of time and determine if we need to change that resource allocation based on the actual workload consumption, as opposed to how IT has configured it. Therefore, we have come to realize that a lot of our workloads are overprovisioned, and we are spending more money in the public cloud than we need to."

More IBM Turbonomic pros

Cons

"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."

"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."

"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 reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."

"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."

"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."

"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."

"It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines."

"Recovering resources when they're not needed is not as optimized as it could be."

"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."

"The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer."

"The deployment process is a little tricky. It wasn't hard for me because I have pretty in-depth knowledge of Kubernetes, and their software runs on Kubernetes. To deploy it or upgrade it, you have to be able to follow steps and use the Kubernetes command line, or you'll need someone to come in and do it for you."

"We're still evaluating the solution, so I don't know enough about what I don't know. They've done a lot over the years. I used Turbonomics six or seven years ago before IBM bought them. They've matured a lot since then."

"There is room for improvement [with] upgrades. We have deployed the newer version, version 8 of Turbonomic. The problem is that there is no way to upgrade between major Turbonomic versions. You can upgrade minor versions without a problem, but when you go from version 6 to version 7, or version 7 to version 8, you basically have to deploy it new and let it start gathering data again. That is a problem because all of the data, all of the savings calculations that had been done on the old version, are gone. There's no way to keep track of your lifetime savings across versions."

"Remove the need for special in-house knowledge and development."

More IBM Turbonomic cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"The solution is reasonably priced."

"It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."

"We see ROI in extended support agreements (ESA) for old software. Migration activities seem to be where Turbonomic has really benefited us the most. It's one click and done. We have new machines ready to go with Turbonomic, which are properly sized instead of somebody sitting there with a spreadsheet and guessing. So, my return on investment would certainly be on currency, from a software and hardware perspective."

"The pricing is in line with the other solutions that we have. It's not a bargain software, nor is it overly expensive."

"I know there have been some issues with the billing, when the numbers were first proposed, as to how much we would save. There was a huge miscommunication on our part. Turbonomic was led to believe that we could optimize our AWS footprint, because we didn't know we couldn't. So, we were promised savings of $750,000. Then, when we came to implement Turbonomic, the developers in AWS said, "Absolutely not. You're not putting that in our environment. We can't scale down anything because they coded it." Our AWS environment is a legacy environment. It has all these old applications, where all the developers who have made it are no longer with the company. Those applications generate a ton of money for us. So, if one breaks, we are really in trouble and they didn't want to have to deal with an environment that was changing and couldn't be supported. That number went from $750,000 to about $450,000. However, that wasn't Turbonomic's fault."

"I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company before IBM's purchase, it was compatible with other tools."

"The product is fairly priced right now. Given its capabilities, it is excellently priced. We think that the product will become self-funding because we will be able to maximize our resources, which will help us from a capacity perspective. That should save us money in the long run."

"In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."

"It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."

More IBM Turbonomic pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

871,408 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	41
Midsize Enterprise	57
Large Enterprise	147

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudCheckr ?

The recommendation section is pretty helpful.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudCheckr ?

The price depends on the actual Azure consumption and what we feed into it. The cost is on par with other providers.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudCheckr ?

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?

It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is set as a percentage of the consumption of some of our customers' services. The ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Turbonomic?

The implementation could be enhanced.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?

We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting. This helps us get a consolidated view of all customer spending into a single d...

See all answers

Comparisons

Flexera Cloud Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 21% of the time

Cloudability vs CloudCheckr

Compared 15% of the time

Apptio One vs CloudCheckr

Compared 13% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 11% of the time

AWS Cost Explorer vs CloudCheckr

Compared 11% of the time

More CloudCheckr Competitors

VMware Aria Operations vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 14% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 7% of the time

Spot vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 6% of the time

Cloudability vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 6% of the time

VMware vSphere vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM Turbonomic Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr

October 2025

Download CloudCheckr product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM Turbonomic

October 2025

Download IBM Turbonomic product report

Also Known As

CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Spot - A Flexera company

IBM

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.

Spot - A Flexera company

IBM Turbonomic offers automation, planning, and right-sizing recommendations to streamline resource management, improve efficiencies, and optimize costs across virtualized environments and cloud platforms.

IBM Turbonomic is valued for its capability to optimize resource allocation and monitor virtual environments efficiently. It facilitates automated decision-making in VM sizing, load balancing, and cost optimization for both on-premises and cloud deployments. Users can leverage insights for workload placement, ensure peak performance assurance, and effectively right-size across VMware and Azure. The ongoing transition to HTML5 aims to improve visual and navigational ease, while expanded reporting features are anticipated. Opportunities for improved training, documentation, and integrations enhance platform usability and functionality.

What Are the Key Features?

Automation: Streamlines resource allocation and VM management.
Planning Tools: Supports capacity management and growth projections.
Right-Sizing: Optimizes VM configurations for efficient resource use.
Customizable Dashboards: Provides quick insights into environment health.
Reporting Capabilities: Offers valuable data for informed decision-making.
Cloud Integration: Ensures cost-effective resource utilization.

What Benefits Should Be Looked For?

Performance Enhancement: Improves application performance efficiency.
Cost Reduction: Minimizes operational expenses through optimizations.
Infrastructure Efficiency: Maximizes use of IT infrastructure resources.

In finance, IBM Turbonomic aids in maintaining platform efficiency during market fluctuations. Healthcare organizations leverage its capability for resource optimization during high-demand periods to enhance patient care support. Retailers use it for planning in peak seasons, ensuring resources align with fluctuating demand to maintain performance continuity.

IBM

Sample Customers

Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic

September 2025

Free Report: CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic

Find out what your peers are saying about CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

871,408 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic report.

See our list of best Cloud Management vendors and best Cloud Cost 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.