We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Wiz based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"It saves time, makes your environment more secure, and improves compliance. PingSafe helps with audits, ensuring that you are following best practices for cloud security. You don't need to be an expert to use it and improve your security."
"PingSafe's integration is smooth. They are highly customer-oriented, and the integration went well for us."
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before PingSafe we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. PingSafe enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to gain deep visibility into the workloads inside containers."
"AKS as a service is very good when you need to leverage applications or functions with much variability in their usage because you're trying to be as efficient as you can with resources."
"I have enjoyed working with all the features."
"The most valuable features of AKS are the full array of capabilities and robust security."
"It is easy to maintain the solution."
"The product’s most valuable features are ease of use and automation."
"Integration and automation are the best features of the solution."
"The tool is budget-friendly."
"AKS is easy to use. We can scale up and down as needed with AKS, which saves us money on our cloud costs."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"The CSPM module has been the most effective. It was easy to deploy and covered all our accounts through APIs, requiring no agents. Wiz provides instant visibility into high-level risks that we need to address."
"The vulnerability management modules and the discovery and inventory are the most valuable features. Before using Wiz, it was a very manual process for both. After implementing it, we're able to get all of the analytics into a single platform that gives us visibility across all the systems in our cloud. We're able to correspond and understand what the vulnerability landscape looks like a lot faster."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"I like Wiz's reporting, and it's easy to do queries. For example, it's pretty simple to find out how many servers we have and the applications installed on each. I like Wiz's security graph because you can use it to see the whole organization even if you have multiple accounts."
"The automation roles are essential because we ultimately want to do less work and automate more. The dashboards are easy to read and visually pleasing. You can understand things quickly, which makes it easy for our other teams. The network and infrastructure teams don't know as much about security as we do, so it helps to have a tool that's accessible and nice to look at."
"With Wiz, we get timely alerts for leaked data or any vulnerabilities already existing in our environment."
"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"The Automation tab is an add-on that doesn’t work properly. They provide a list of scripts that don’t work and I have asked support to assist but they won’t help. When running on various endpoints the script doesn’t work and if it does, it’s only a couple. There are a lot of useful scripts that would be beneficial to run forensics, event logs, and process lists running on the endpoint."
"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"The Kubernetes scanning on the Oracle Cloud needs to be improved. It's on the roadmap. AWS has this capability, but it's unavailable for Oracle Cloud."
"More control over Infra scanning can be introduced."
"The solution should improve its UI and cost."
"AKS could enhance its functionality by introducing a blueprint feature that streamlines and expedites the process. With a blueprint, users can leverage pre-defined configurations, including some common survey elements, reducing the need for extensive customization and allowing us to focus on our core business activities. Additionally, if the blueprint covers security aspects, it would be greatly beneficial, as it eliminates the need for us to build security expertise from scratch. Currently, we encounter challenges during cloud onboarding, security implementation, and adapting to Kubernetes. Although Microsoft may not consider these as their direct responsibility, providing a blueprint similar to what they offer to developers would be highly advantageous."
"One area that could be improved is the Azure CLI. It would be beneficial if they could abstract some of the complexities related to deployment scripts and make them a part of Azure CLI."
"There are some limitations with the tutor version, particularly in terms of using a lot of free audio. The private level also has restrictions, limiting the number of audio files you can access to just 50. If you want more, you need to contact support."
"There are a lot of features that should be included with the AKS."
"The engineering team can reduce the management of the platform itself by improving the data plane part of the system to upload more management."
"Sometimes, it fails to provide specific metrics."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"We would like to see improvements to executive-level reporting and data reporting in general, which we understand is being rolled out to the platform."
"One significant issue is that the searches are case-sensitive, so finding a misconfigured resource can become very challenging."
"We're looking at some of the data compliance stuff that they've got Jon offer. I know they're looking at container security, which we gonna be looking at next."
"We wish there were a way, beyond providing visibility and automated remediation, to wait on a given remediation, due to a critical aspect, such as the cost associated with a particular upgrade... We would like to see preventive controls that can be applied through Wiz to protect against vulnerabilities that we're not going to be able to remediate immediately."
"The reporting isn't that great. They have executive summaries, but it's only a compliance report that maps all current issues to specific controls. Whether you look at one subscription or project, regardless of the size, you will get a multipage report on how the issues in that account map to that control. Our CSO isn't going to read through that. He won't filter that out or show that to his leadership and say, "Here's what we're doing." It isn't a helpful report. They're working on it, but it's a poor executive summary."
"The only small pain point has been around some of the logging integrations. Some of the complexities of the script integrations aren't supported with some of the more automated infrastructure components. So, it's not as universal. For example, they have great support for cloud formation and other services, but if you're using another type of management utility or governance language for your infrastructure-as-code automation components, it becomes a little bit trickier to navigate that."
"Wiz's reporting capabilities could be refined a bit. They are making headway on that, but more executive-style dashboards would be nice. They just implemented a community aspect where you can share documents and feedback. This was something users had been requesting for a while. They are listening to customer feedback and making changes."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while Wiz is ranked 2nd in Container Security with 12 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while Wiz is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wiz writes "Multiple features help us prioritize remediation, and agentless implementation reduces overhead". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with Red Hat OpenShift, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher and Qualys VMDR, whereas Wiz is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Orca Security, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, AWS Security Hub and Lacework. See our Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Wiz report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.