No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo

Top 10 Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Alternatives

Vendor: Microsoft
4.2 out of 5
Leave a review

Top Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Cloudflare One, iboss, and Cisco Umbrella. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps surpasses its competitors by offering comprehensive security management, advanced threat detection, and seamless integration with Microsoft 365, providing enhanced visibility and control over cloud applications to ensure data protection and compliance.

Microsoft Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Microsoft, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cloudflare One
4.3 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cloudflare One
4.3 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers comprehensive security features, ideal for organizations using Microsoft ecosystems. In comparison, Cloudflare One provides superior DDoS protection and straightforward deployment, geared towards application-specific security. Tech buyers choose based on ecosystem compatibility and security needs.
Download Cloudflare One vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps involves initial setup expenses, while Cloudflare One offers a lower-cost setup option. The key difference lies in the setup cost, highlighting Microsoft Defender's higher initial financial commitment.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps involves initial setup expenses, while Cloudflare One offers a lower-cost setup option. The key difference lies in the setup cost, highlighting Microsoft Defender's higher initial financial commitment.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
iboss
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
iboss
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps appeals to those within Microsoft's ecosystem, offering seamless integration and advanced automation. In comparison, iboss's advantages include transparent pricing and ease of use, ideal for organizations prioritizing predictable costs and straightforward deployment over deep Microsoft integration.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. iboss Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a lower setup cost, while iboss requires a larger initial investment. Defender's competitive pricing contrasts with iboss, which may appeal more to enterprises seeking robust security features despite higher costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a lower setup cost, while iboss requires a larger initial investment. Defender's competitive pricing contrasts with iboss, which may appeal more to enterprises seeking robust security features despite higher costs.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cisco Umbrella
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cisco Umbrella
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers strong Microsoft ecosystem integration with comprehensive control features, while Cisco Umbrella focuses on DNS security and flexible deployment. In comparison, Microsoft Defender faces integration challenges, whereas Cisco Umbrella could enhance its user interfaces for better experience.
Download Cisco Umbrella vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a low initial setup cost, making it more accessible, while Cisco Umbrella's higher setup cost may appeal to organizations prioritizing advanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a low initial setup cost, making it more accessible, while Cisco Umbrella's higher setup cost may appeal to organizations prioritizing advanced features.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks
4.1 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps integrates seamlessly with Microsoft services and offers comprehensive threat detection. In comparison, Prisma Access excels in secure remote access and supports global deployments. Microsoft integrates well with existing Microsoft licenses; Prisma provides scalability and security for complex environments.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a minimal setup cost, with transparent pricing and flexible licensing options. In comparison, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks also offers competitive pricing, affordable setup costs, and a user-friendly licensing process.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a minimal setup cost, with transparent pricing and flexible licensing options. In comparison, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks also offers competitive pricing, affordable setup costs, and a user-friendly licensing process.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides real-time threat detection and seamless Microsoft integration, appealing to businesses using Microsoft ecosystems. In comparison, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is ideal for organizations prioritizing seamless remote access and user experience with strong zero trust and SASE functionalities.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps typically incurs a lower setup cost compared to the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, making it a more budget-friendly option with initial implementation, whereas Zscaler might offer more comprehensive features justifying its higher setup cost.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps typically incurs a lower setup cost compared to the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, making it a more budget-friendly option with initial implementation, whereas Zscaler might offer more comprehensive features justifying its higher setup cost.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Cato SASE Cloud Platform
4.5 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in stopping shadow IT and integrating with Microsoft services, enhancing security management. In comparison, Cato SASE Cloud Platform offers superior network performance with advanced firewall capabilities and seamless management, appealing to those needing zero-trust network solutions.
Download Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps requires a moderate setup cost, whereas Cato SASE Cloud Platform has a minimal setup expense, highlighting the cost differences in deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps requires a moderate setup cost, whereas Cato SASE Cloud Platform has a minimal setup expense, highlighting the cost differences in deployment.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Netskope
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Netskope
4.2 out of 5
Netskope offers superior CASB capabilities and granular application control, making it suitable for robust data protection. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in seamless integration within Microsoft ecosystems, ideal for organizations utilizing multiple Microsoft services for unified security management.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Netskope Report
Pricing is a little expensive but it is affordable.
They should work on licensing costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Pricing is a little expensive but it is affordable.
They should work on licensing costs.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Anomali
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Anomali
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in stopping shadow IT, integrating with Azure Active Directory and Microsoft Sentinel. In comparison, Anomali offers strong threat modeling and data correlation. A tech buyer might prefer Defender for its seamless Microsoft integration, while Anomali appeals with its robust threat intelligence.
Download Anomali vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps entails a straightforward initial setup, whereas Anomali's setup process might require more effort. The difference in setup complexities highlights the contrasting approaches and user readiness needed for each solution.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps entails a straightforward initial setup, whereas Anomali's setup process might require more effort. The difference in setup complexities highlights the contrasting approaches and user readiness needed for each solution.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Palo Alto Networks WildFire
4.2 out of 5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire excels in threat detection with real-time updates, offering high availability. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps ensures cloud security with seamless Microsoft integration. WildFire is complex and costly; Defender is quick to deploy and cost-effective within Microsoft plans.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire Report
Palo Alto Networks WildFire features a higher setup cost, offering advanced threat protection capabilities, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps presents a more budget-friendly alternative focusing on cloud security integration.
View comparison
Pricing
Palo Alto Networks WildFire features a higher setup cost, offering advanced threat protection capabilities, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps presents a more budget-friendly alternative focusing on cloud security integration.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline
4.3 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in threat detection and broad ecosystem integration, enhancing security posture. In comparison, Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline focuses on network visibility and traffic insights. This contrast helps tech buyers choose based on integration needs or visibility depth.
Download Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a moderate setup cost, while Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline incurs a higher initial setup expense, distinguishing itself with advanced capabilities requiring significant investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a moderate setup cost, while Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline incurs a higher initial setup expense, distinguishing itself with advanced capabilities requiring significant investment.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Skyhigh Security
4.1 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Skyhigh Security
4.1 out of 5
Skyhigh Security provides robust cloud data protection with customizable features, though users face challenges in slow report generation. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps integrates seamlessly with Microsoft services, enhancing threat detection, but struggles with alert delays and integrating non-Microsoft apps.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Skyhigh Security Report
Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost.
The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Skyhigh provided a FedRAMP solution, tokenization, a better shadow IT capability, and lower cost.
The biggest thing to watch for is the difference in price per monitored user for the different API integrations.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
The NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai
4.4 out of 5

NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai is used for penetration testing. It integrates with vulnerability management, offering automated testing, GPU-powered tasks, cloud deployment, and actionable insights. Users benefit from streamlined processes like vulnerability prioritization, network scans, and fast synchronization, though demand exists for enhanced reporting, threat detection, and better naming conventions.

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. The NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai Report
View comparison
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides expansive cross-cloud integration and robust threat detection, while Morphisec focuses on endpoint security with signatureless threat prevention. In comparison, Morphisec offers lightweight performance, appealing to those minimizing resource use, whereas Defender suits enterprises in the Microsoft ecosystem.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Morphisec Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has higher setup costs compared to Morphisec. This difference highlights a pricing advantage for Morphisec, appealing to users with budget constraints.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has higher setup costs compared to Morphisec. This difference highlights a pricing advantage for Morphisec, appealing to users with budget constraints.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall
4.1 out of 5
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall excels in firewall capabilities, offering robust scalability and ease of management, ideal for enterprises seeking a comprehensive solution with minimal staffing. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides strong integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, appealing to organizations prioritizing cloud security.
Download Barracuda CloudGen Firewall vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall offers a straightforward setup cost that is often lower, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps tends to have a varied setup cost, highlighting clear pricing differences between the solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Barracuda CloudGen Firewall offers a straightforward setup cost that is often lower, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps tends to have a varied setup cost, highlighting clear pricing differences between the solutions.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
SentinelOne Singularity Identity
4.5 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in integration with Microsoft solutions, while SentinelOne Singularity Identity offers advanced AI and behavioral analysis. In comparison, SentinelOne emphasizes customer service and innovation, while Microsoft balances cost-effectiveness with Microsoft 365 bundling benefits.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. SentinelOne Singularity Identity Report
The price is affordable.
SentinelOne seemed to offer more while being priced lower than its competitors.
View comparison
Pricing
The price is affordable.
SentinelOne seemed to offer more while being priced lower than its competitors.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Check Point Infinity
4.4 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in Microsoft product integration and shadow IT detection, ideal for Microsoft-focused environments. In comparison, Check Point Infinity supports robust Zero Trust security across diverse environments with ThreatCloud AI. Both solutions offer strong ROI with different strengths in integration and threat prevention.
Download Check Point Infinity vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps reviews highlight low initial setup costs, whereas Check Point Infinity's reviews mention higher setup expenses, making a significant distinction between the two solutions in terms of budget considerations.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps reviews highlight low initial setup costs, whereas Check Point Infinity's reviews mention higher setup expenses, making a significant distinction between the two solutions in terms of budget considerations.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
IRONSCALES
4.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
IRONSCALES
4.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels in seamless integration with Microsoft's ecosystem. In comparison, IRONSCALES focuses on automated phishing detection and AI-driven analytics. Tech buyers may prefer Defender for enhanced Microsoft integration, whereas they might choose IRONSCALES for email threat reduction.
Download IRONSCALES vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a straightforward setup cost structure, while IRONSCALES presents a more complex pricing model. The difference highlights a key contrast in initial deployment expenses between the two platforms.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers a straightforward setup cost structure, while IRONSCALES presents a more complex pricing model. The difference highlights a key contrast in initial deployment expenses between the two platforms.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Trellix Network Detection and Response
4.2 out of 5
Trellix Network Detection and Response offers advanced detection capabilities for zero-day attacks and malware analysis. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps focuses on integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, providing comprehensive threat detection and application visibility, ideal for organizations utilizing Microsoft's suite of tools.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response Report
Trellix Network Detection and Response involves an initial setup cost, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides a cost-effective and user-friendly setup. Trellix offers advanced detection capabilities, while Microsoft seamlessly integrates with existing cloud environments.
View comparison
Pricing
Trellix Network Detection and Response involves an initial setup cost, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps provides a cost-effective and user-friendly setup. Trellix offers advanced detection capabilities, while Microsoft seamlessly integrates with existing cloud environments.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Akamai Enterprise Application Access
4.5 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps integrates seamlessly with Microsoft platforms, benefiting businesses within the Microsoft ecosystem. In comparison, Akamai Enterprise Application Access delivers a zero trust architecture and global scalability, attracting organizations with diverse, multi-cloud environments and complex IT needs.
Download Akamai Enterprise Application Access vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a straightforward setup cost, while Akamai Enterprise Application Access features a more complex pricing structure. Notably, Microsoft focuses on ease of setup, contrasting with Akamai's more intricate entry process.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a straightforward setup cost, while Akamai Enterprise Application Access features a more complex pricing structure. Notably, Microsoft focuses on ease of setup, contrasting with Akamai's more intricate entry process.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Forcepoint ONE
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Forcepoint ONE
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps integrates seamlessly with Microsoft products, enhancing security postures with extensive threat detection and insights. In comparison, Forcepoint ONE offers strong Zero Trust Network Access and data protection, focusing on ease of use and granular security features.
Download Forcepoint ONE vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps requires minimal setup cost, while Forcepoint ONE involves higher initial expenses. Differences in setup investment highlight varying pricing approaches between these solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps requires minimal setup cost, while Forcepoint ONE involves higher initial expenses. Differences in setup investment highlight varying pricing approaches between these solutions.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Axis Security
4.8 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Axis Security
4.8 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps appeals with cost-effectiveness and strong Microsoft integration. In comparison, Axis Security attracts with advanced, agentless access solutions despite higher costs. Tech buyers may favor Microsoft for integration and economy, while Axis suits those prioritizing innovative, hands-off access.
Download Axis Security vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a lower setup cost compared to Axis Security, which may involve higher initial expenses. This difference highlights the cost considerations users should evaluate when selecting between these security solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a lower setup cost compared to Axis Security, which may involve higher initial expenses. This difference highlights the cost considerations users should evaluate when selecting between these security solutions.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Veritas Alta SaaS Protection
4.0 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps integrates seamlessly with Microsoft's ecosystem, making it ideal for comprehensive visibility and threat detection. In comparison, Veritas Alta SaaS Protection appeals to organizations focused on data security and recovery, offering ease of use and strong backup capabilities.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Veritas Alta SaaS Protection Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps typically involves moderate setup costs, while Veritas Alta SaaS Protection often incurs higher setup expenses. Microsoft Defender's lower initial investment can be a significant consideration compared to Veritas Alta's potentially larger initial financ...
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps typically involves moderate setup costs, while Veritas Alta SaaS Protection often incurs higher setup expenses. Microsoft Defender's lower initial investment can be a significant consideration compared to Veritas Alta's potentially larger initial financ...
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Check Point SandBlast Network
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps integrates seamlessly with Microsoft's ecosystem, offering comprehensive app management and security posture management. In comparison, Check Point SandBlast Network focuses on real-time threat extraction and deep file analysis for zero-day attack prevention, ideal for network security and on-premise integration.
Download Check Point SandBlast Network vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps involves a higher setup cost than Check Point SandBlast Network, making it less feasible for those with limited budgets, whereas Check Point SandBlast Network provides a cost-effective setup option for businesses prioritizing budget constraints.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps involves a higher setup cost than Check Point SandBlast Network, making it less feasible for those with limited budgets, whereas Check Point SandBlast Network provides a cost-effective setup option for businesses prioritizing budget constraints.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Obsidian CDR Platform
1 out of 5
Obsidian CDR Platform efficiently centralizes data management, providing reliable integration and analytics capabilities. Valuable features include comprehensive data processing and robust security measures. There is room for improvement in enhancing performance speed and expanding support for diverse data types.
View comparison
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Symantec Advanced Threat Protection
3.9 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps offers seamless integration with Microsoft products, enhancing threat detection and management. In comparison, Symantec Advanced Threat Protection provides robust integration with SIEM products and delivers extensive application control, suiting organizations needing diverse network protection and real-time threat analysis.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Symantec Advanced Threat Protection Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a straightforward setup cost, while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection involves a higher initial expense.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a straightforward setup cost, while Symantec Advanced Threat Protection involves a higher initial expense.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Forcepoint CASB
3.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Forcepoint CASB
3.6 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels with seamless integration across Microsoft products, enhancing threat detection and visibility for cloud applications. In comparison, Forcepoint CASB offers satisfactory application visibility and control but faces challenges with backend stability and complex deployment in public cloud environments.
Download Forcepoint CASB vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels with lower setup costs, while Forcepoint CASB offers robust features at a higher initial price, highlighting a trade-off between affordability and comprehensive capabilities in cloud service security.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps excels with lower setup costs, while Forcepoint CASB offers robust features at a higher initial price, highlighting a trade-off between affordability and comprehensive capabilities in cloud service security.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Zscaler Private Access (ZPA)
4.5 out of 5
Zscaler Private Access (ZPA) provides secure remote access by transitioning from traditional VPNs to next-gen services. It excels in AI-enhanced security, micro-segmentation, and flexible policy management, integrating with Active Directory. Despite its strengths, users note areas for improvement, such as posture profiles, rule customization limits, and annual price increases.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Zscaler Private Access (ZPA) Report
View comparison
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Logo
Symantec CloudSOC CASB
4.2 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is appreciated for its competitive pricing and integration within Microsoft environments, offering easier deployment. In comparison, Symantec CloudSOC CASB provides comprehensive features, extensive security capabilities, and adaptability, justifying its higher cost for security-conscious organizations.
Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Symantec CloudSOC CASB Report
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a lower initial setup cost, while Symantec CloudSOC CASB involves higher setup expenses, indicating potential differences in pricing strategy and initial accessibility.
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has a lower initial setup cost, while Symantec CloudSOC CASB involves higher setup expenses, indicating potential differences in pricing strategy and initial accessibility.

Related categories

Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
Microsoft Security Suite