CloudCheckr vs Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) comparison

Spot and Kovai.co are both solutions in the Cloud Management category. Spot is ranked #29 with an average rating of 7.0, while Kovai.co is ranked #61. Spot holds a 1.2% mindshare in CM, compared to Kovai.co’s 0.3% mindshare. Additionally, 66% of Spot users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Kovai.co users who would recommend it.

CloudCheckr

Read 8 CloudCheckr reviews

465 Views
224 Comparison Views

66% willing to recommend

Turbo360 (Formerly Serverle...

Read 2 Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) reviews

89 Views
35 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CloudCheckr

Turbo360 (Formerly Serverle...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

CloudCheckr and Turbo360 are competing solutions in the cloud management category. CloudCheckr is perceived to have the upper hand in data analytics and comprehensive cost management tools, providing a strong return on investment through its extensive feature set.

Features: CloudCheckr offers advanced cost management, resource optimization capabilities, and detailed financial analysis, making it suitable for businesses focusing on financial efficiency. Turbo360 provides intuitive tracking and management mechanisms for serverless applications and Azure resources, along with unique customization for serverless environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Turbo360 provides a streamlined deployment process tailored for Azure environments, facilitating easier management of distributed resources. Its customer support efficiently addresses deployment issues. CloudCheckr's deployment may require more technical expertise, yet it offers reliable support for optimizing complex infrastructure. Turbo360's focus on simplicity and support makes it slightly more favorable for those prioritizing ease of setup.

Pricing and ROI: CloudCheckr has a competitive pricing structure that aligns with its comprehensive feature set, delivering significant ROI through cost reduction. Turbo360 may have higher initial costs due to its advanced functionality tailored for Azure and serverless platforms, yet it provides value for those requiring specialized cloud services management. CloudCheckr's affordability and detailed analytics offer greater financial benefit, whereas Turbo360 justifies its higher expense with unique functionalities.

To learn more, read our detailed CloudCheckr vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360)

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 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

29th

Ranking in Cloud Cost Management

10th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed Cloud Services (3rd)

Turbo360 (Formerly Serverle...

Ranking in Cloud Management

61st

Ranking in Cloud Cost Management

30th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (71st), Cloud Monitoring Software (49th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Cloud Management category, the mindshare of CloudCheckr is 1.2%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

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

reviewer1868589

Python Engineer at Msys Technologies

Great topic subscription monitoring, helpful management, and useful for audits

Addition of more monitoring features to Azure Cosmos DB can be a huge help as we use the same as the main database for our applications. One more thing to note is that their support team was always ready to clear all our doubts regarding the product but we feel that it would be much appreciated if they could share with us the required resources to get new customers like us well-versed in traversing through different modules of the product. These are the very few areas where Serverless360 can be improved.

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 initial setup is straightforward."

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

"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."

"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."

"The solution is scalable for our purposes."

"The solution is mostly stable."

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

"It offers all the core capabilities we need to manage and monitor our Azure services."

"Service Bus topic subscription monitoring turned out to be the most useful for us."

Cons

"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."

"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."

"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."

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

"The solution must improve its user interface."

"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."

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

"Addition of more monitoring features to Azure Cosmos DB can be a huge help as we use the same as the main database for our applications."

"The user interface of Serveress360 could be improved a bit to make the platform even easier to use."

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."

Information not available

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

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

40%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Real Estate/Law Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Apptio One vs CloudCheckr

Compared 19% of the time

Flexera Cloud Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 19% of the time

IBM Turbonomic vs CloudCheckr

Compared 15% of the time

Cloudability vs CloudCheckr

Compared 11% of the time

AWS Cost Explorer vs CloudCheckr

Compared 11% of the time

More CloudCheckr Competitors

Azure Monitor vs Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360)

Compared 60% of the time

Grafana vs Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360)

Compared 40% of the time

More Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr

June 2025

Download CloudCheckr product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability

June 2025

Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) report

Download Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) product report

Also Known As

CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP

Serverless360

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

Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) is an advanced Cloud Management platform that empowers you with significant Azure Cost savings and Infra Monitoring for complex Azure Environments. Our customers have experienced annual savings of up to 30% through advanced cost monitoring, granular analysis, optimization insights, and reduced incident resolution time by 80% through holistic infra monitoring across multiple Azure resources with business context. Also, our platform stands out by offering all the necessary features for incorporating FinOps practice into your organization, ensuring an accurate and granular source of truth about costs for all your stakeholders. By seamlessly offering infrastructure monitoring and cost management in one place, we aim to help maximize your ROI on Azure investments.

Our Core features:

Get clarity on your investments: Get unparalleled visibility of your spending with advanced Azure cost analysis across Azure tenants, teams and any business units.
Eliminate wasteful spending: Ensure cost reductions through strategic recommendations for rightsizing resources/purchasing reserved instances and setting up auto-pausing of resources outside business hours.
Accelerate incident resolution: Tie monitoring alerts to business units and remediate faster with a single report spotlighting critical issues across Azure services, streamlining your focus on troubleshooting.
End-to-end business tracking: Bring business context over the messages flowing through intricate Azure/hybrid integration for effectively tracking and troubleshooting critical issues.
Technical Azure Documentation: Auto-generate documentations on resource usage, cost/security and generate editable diagrams for seamlessly sharing them with relevant stakeholders.

Kovai.co

Sample Customers

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

MSC, Transalta, Rank Group, RACQ, BBC, Q2 Solutions, Middleway, BUPA, Columbia Sportswear, EDF

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360)

May 2025

Free Report: CloudCheckr vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360)

Find out what your peers are saying about CloudCheckr vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CloudCheckr vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) 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.