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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs WithSecure Elements Exposure Management (XM) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 18, 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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
5th
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 (6th), Container Security (5th), 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)
WithSecure Elements Exposur...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
78th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
37th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (27th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 3.1%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WithSecure Elements Exposure Management (XM) is 0.5%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud3.1%
WithSecure Elements Exposure Management (XM)0.5%
Other96.4%
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

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.
PP
System Specialist at Fix-Forum Oy
Stable, scalable, and can be deployed on both cloud and on-premises
We usually need the solution to have extra protection against data breaches, as we have seen with our customers. The solution is deployed on the public cloud The solution works both outside and on-premises of the company, thus preventing secondary breaches from reaching the company's data. The…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We can create alerts that trigger if there is any malicious activity happening in the workflow and these alerts can be retrieved using the query language."
"Our primary use case of this solution is to monitor infrastructure."
"The security policy is the most valuable feature for us. We can go into the environment settings and attach any globally recognized framework like ISO or any benchmark."
"It's got a lot of great features."
"The most valuable feature is the regulatory compliance aspect, where we utilize predefined initiatives like NIST."
"The scalability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is very good."
"If you're in the world of cloud and your company is using Azure as their primary cloud, I think Azure Security Center is a must-have feature, because it provides a bird's eye view of the entire security position of the organization."
"The dashboard is very good; it gives our clients a lot of information and allows them to have a complete overview of the system, with everything visible in one glance."
"The solution works both outside and on-premises of the company, thus preventing secondary breaches from reaching the company's data."
 

Cons

"Microsoft does a fairly good job, but many products are developed from an engineer's perspective rather than the end user perspective, making the intuitive flow of the interface sometimes less than optimal."
"Features like code scanning and pipeline scanning are not included in the solution."
"To improve Microsoft Defender for Cloud, I think pricing-wise, the license price is a little bit higher from an ingestion cost perspective."
"As an analyst, there is no way to configure or create a playbook to automate the process of flagging suspicious domains."
"Agent features need to be improved. Sometimes, we are not able to get correct signals from the machines on which we have installed these agents."
"There should be an automated mechanism to design Azure policies based on the recommendations, possibly with AI integration. Instead of an engineer having to write a policy to fix security gaps, which is very time-consuming, there should be an inbuilt capability to auto-remediate everything and have proper control in place."
"However, some Copilot features aren't available in the GCP environment. This is something we hope will be addressed in the future."
"Azure Security Center takes a long time to update, compared to the on-premises version of Microsoft Defender."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."
"Defender's basic version is free, which is good. Many of our teams are evaluating the paid version against third-party products."
"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."
"Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"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."
"They have a free version, but the license for this one isn't too high. It's free to start with, and you're charged for using it beyond 30 days. Some other pieces of Defender are charged based on usage, so you will be charged more for a high volume of transactions. I believe Defender for Cloud is a daily charge based on Azure's App Service Pricing."
"There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."
"This is a worldwide service and depending on the country, there will be different prices."
"The cost of the solution is mid-ranged but worth the price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise49
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 costs, and licensing was that the license cost was the only consideration. Setup and support had no issues.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
To improve Microsoft Defender for Cloud, I think pricing-wise, the license price is a little bit higher from an ingestion cost perspective. Depending on what license you choose, you might have to p...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Wiz, Tenable, Qualys and others in Vulnerability Management. Updated: May 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.