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

JupiterOne vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

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

JupiterOne
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
49th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
30th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (22nd), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (5th)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
7th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
Container Management (8th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (1st), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (4th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of JupiterOne is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 3.6%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud3.6%
JupiterOne0.3%
Other96.1%
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

CO
Security Analyst at a outsourcing company with 501-1,000 employees
Unified asset visibility has improved investigations and now simplifies tracking security assets
There are some features that I have shared with our customer service manager. One of them that is relevant to us at this time is the need for better determination of unified devices. Currently, JupiterOne uses hostname weights, MAC addresses, or IP addresses to tie devices together, but we have actually requested a way for us to make those determinations ourselves. For example, when externally scanning a device using Qualys, internally it gives an IP address or FQDN, while externally it might be different. We want to be able to decide ourselves that these two devices are the same device even when they have different names and IP addresses for external and internal use. The unified devices feature is valuable and did not used to exist, and it has been fantastic. However, I believe more can be done regarding unified devices, and giving users the privilege to tie them together would be a good addition to the platform. One of the other things that interest us in JupiterOne and why we really wanted to use the tool is the compliance feature. We wanted to use it to track our compliance since we are ISO 27001 certified. However, the compliance module has not worked well, and we have had to continue tracking our compliance manually with the tools we use. Although there are some works in progress to improve the compliance part of the tool, I think if they can get it up to speed, that would be a really good improvement.
RW
Head Of IT at Cirrus Response
Cloud security has cut investigation time and now reveals threats faster but needs simpler oversight
When deploying AI applications, my key security concerns with Microsoft Defender for Cloud are data loss, leakage of data, and guardrails around the actual AI, and I am hoping that this is going to help me put those guardrails in place and identify data exfiltration. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has not helped me manage and secure multi-cloud environments, as we are 100 percent Microsoft and have not really got it in any other environment at all. I am not yet using the unified AI-powered security feature offered by Microsoft Defender for Cloud, but that is coming. I am not yet using the integrated XDR feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud, but that is coming. I am not yet utilizing the GenAI threat protection features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud. That is also coming and a lot of that will come from learning it here. I have enabled the agentless scanning in my cloud environment with Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Assessing the impact on my workload protection without needing to install agents with Microsoft Defender for Cloud makes it a lot easier, but it also identifies a lot more, which puts more load on me sometimes. I would advise another organization considering Microsoft Defender for Cloud that it is the most logical route to follow if their whole ecosystem is Microsoft. It is easy to implement and it is very self-explanatory when doing it, making sense to just follow the steps as it is too simple, really. I would rate this review a 7.5 out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product’s UI is pretty decent and fast."
"JupiterOne helps us aggregate all those things on one single platform, allowing us to quickly identify what environment that asset lives in and what type of asset it is."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring of users, endpoint detection and response, and the adaptability of the AI threat intelligence engine, which quickly adapts to customizations."
"With respect to improving our security posture, it helps us to understand where we are in terms of compliance. We can easily know when we are below the standard because of the scores it calculates."
"The UX and UI are very good. Users have more of a taste for Microsoft UI."
"The valuable features include the ability to manage devices and the fact that Defender can replace other security tools like SCCM."
"Defender is user-friendly and provides decent visibility into threats."
"Everything is built into Azure, and if we go for cross-cloud development with Azure Arc, we can use most of the features. While it's possible to deploy and convert third-party applications, it is difficult to maintain, whereas Azure deployments to the cloud are always easier. Also, Microsoft is a big company, so they always provide enough support, and we trust the Microsoft brand."
"The technical support is very good."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud has made our environment more secure."
 

Cons

"You can only write Python queries in Jupiter, not other languages, like, SQL or PySpark."
"However, the compliance module has not worked well, and we have had to continue tracking our compliance manually with the tools we use."
"I rate Microsoft support five out of 10. It's difficult to get the necessary support when tickets are first opened."
"I would like to see better automation when it comes to pushing out security features to the recommendations, and better documentation on the step-by-step procedures for enabling certain features."
"I rate Microsoft support five out of 10. It gets better once you're escalated past the first and second levels. It's difficult to get the necessary support when tickets are first opened."
"You cannot create custom use cases."
"From a compliance standpoint, they can include some more metrics and some specific compliances such as GDPR."
"The solution could improve by being more intuitive and easier to use requiring less technical knowledge."
"I would like to see more connectors and plugins with other platforms."
"Microsoft Defender could be more centralized. For example, I still need to go to another console to do policy management."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I'm not privy to that information, but I know it's probably close to a million dollars a year."
"I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good."
"Pricing is difficult because each license has its own metrics and cost."
"Pricing depends on your workload size, but it is very cheap. If you're talking about virtual machines, it is $5 or something for each machine, which is minimal. If you go for some agent-based solution for every virtual machine, then you need to pay the same thing or more than that. For an on-premises solution like this, we were paying around $30 to $50 based on size. With Defender, Microsoft doesn't bother about the size. You pay based on the number of machines. So, if you have 10 virtual machines, and 10 virtual machines are being monitored, you are paying based on that rather than the size of the virtual machine. Thus, you are paying for the number of units rather than paying for the size of your units."
"Although I am outside of the discussion on budget and costing, I can say that the importance of security provided by this solution is of such importance that whatever the cost is, it is not a factor."
"Pricing is a consideration, but we strive to keep costs low by enabling only necessary services."
"There are two different plans. We're using the secure basic plan, but we have used the end security plan as well. There are additional costs, but it gives us more functionalities compared to the basic plan."
"The price of the solution is good for the features we receive and there is an additional cost for Microsoft premier support. However, some of my potential customers have found it to be expensive and have gone on to choose another solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise49
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with JupiterOne?
There are some features that I have shared with our customer service manager. One of them that is relevant to us at this time is the need for better determination of unified devices. Currently, Jup...
What is your primary use case for JupiterOne?
Our main use case for JupiterOne is as an asset catalog tool where we document all our assets that are integrated from different platforms such as Device42, Qualys, Microsoft M365, and Defender. We...
What advice do you have for others considering JupiterOne?
JupiterOne has many features. Although none comes to mind almost immediately, I know it often depends on how we are able to write or craft the queries. JupiterOne has been very instrumental to me i...
How is Prisma Cloud vs Azure Security Center for security?
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Microsoft Defender for Cloud was pretty straightforward. We did have a consultation with a third party to go over different tiers and produ...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
Microsoft Defender for Cloud can be improved. An additional feature that should be included in the next release is Zero Trust, similar to ThreatLocker software.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about JupiterOne vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.