We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and Saviynt based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is the preferred choice over Saviynt as it provides comprehensive threat protection, anti-spam capabilities, and integration with other Microsoft technologies. Users appreciate the real-time graphical data and ability to monitor applications at an enterprise level. Although there is room for improvement in features, integration, and pricing, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has provided various returns on investment for organizations, including cost reductions, faster reaction times, and increased uptime. Overall, it is considered a valuable add-on to existing Microsoft licenses.
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The solution is stable."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"One of the most valuable features is auditing. Some of the other protection services have issues with auditing. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has an excellent auditing technique that helps us avoid the risk of filtering or information loss. You can use different tools to guarantee these things. It allows you to conduct an in-depth exploration of applications, users, and files that are harmful or suspicious. You can also enhance your security setup by creating personalized rules or policies that help you better control traffic in the cloud."
"The ability to prevent users from using certain applications is one of the most valuable features. It doesn't require any configuration for implementation from the client perspective. It just works right away and gives you the information you need."
"The most valuable feature is its policy implementation."
"I like the web GUI/the management interface. I also like the security of Microsoft. As compared to other manufacturers, it's less complex and easy to understand and work with."
"Defender helps us control which applications are being used and gain more security insight into remote and hybrid users based on user identity and log in location. You can also integrate Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender for Endpoint to extend its capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the seamless integration across different clouds."
"Threat detection is its key feature, and that's why we use this tool. It gives an alert if a PC is attacked or there is any kind of anomaly, such as there is a spike in sending emails or we see an unauthorized website being accessed. So, it keeps us on our toes. We get to know that there is something wrong, and we can isolate the user and find any issues with it. So, threat detection is very robust in this tool."
"Better logging allows us to find problems and take appropriate steps to lock them out."
"One of the tool's advantages is its user-friendly interface, making it easier to manipulate from a GUI perspective. The graphical user interface for users and administrators is straightforward. While it may require more configuration initially, once set up, it becomes more accessible and easier to use."
"It is very easy to use. It addresses most of the trends in identity governance and risk management."
"The repository has many features where you can define primary and secondary owners."
"This product works well out of the box and if you don’t want to do a lot of configuration then this is the best tool."
"The product is flexible to use."
"Saviynt is used for the greenfield implementation for the whole IAM, IGA, MFA, SSO, and access management."
"The dedicated Freshdesk platform is a user community and a step in the right direction for offering learning resources."
"It's easy to manage and easy to use; a simple tool for end-users."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"I would prefer to have filtering options incorporated within the policies, enabling the solution to perform tasks beyond mere blocking or allowing."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps' initial setup was quite technical but we were prepared. The time of the implementation depends on the job and how many users are being set up."
"I would like to see them include more features in the older licenses. There are some features that are not available, such as preventing or analyzing cloud attacks."
"There could be more granular roles that are out of the box included in the product."
"There are challenges with detection and there are challenges with false-positive rates."
"It doesn't actually decrease the time to respond. This has been an issue with Microsoft recently. Sometimes, there is a delay when it comes to getting an alert policy email... Sometimes it takes two or three hours for that email to be sent."
"It takes some time to scan and apply the policies when there is some sensitive information. After it applies the policies, it works, but there is a delay. This is something for which we are working with Microsoft."
"The interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"The technical support team's response time could be improved."
"The solution does not work very well as the number of users increases."
"The product's stability is not easy to maintain."
"An area for improvement in Saviynt is that there's a limitation on the number of logs you can get from the past twenty-four hours. For example, if the data is huge, the tool can only give you a maximum of one hundred logs. You can't get any further than that. In the next version of Saviynt, however, you can get more logs and you'll see them inside the log rotation. For example, when you're trying to search inside the log, you can select a date range, and then you can search for a particular log. We haven't used that new log rotation feature yet, but it's included in the next release of Saviynt. Another area for improvement in the tool is that it doesn't have a server monitoring feature, so if your server has a high load, it should give you a warning. You're supposed to get an alert similar to what's being done in WebLogic. In WebLogic, we had a separate facility, but in Saviynt, that feature's missing."
"We sometimes experience performance issues when the solution fails to process the data between two different applications."
"The company needs to do more to establish standard practices within the product itself that are common in the industry."
"The configuration process at the beginning can be difficult, depending on the complexity of the company."
"The biggest drawback is that for every change you want to make, you have to go back to them and ask for it."
More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is ranked 2nd in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 30 reviews while Saviynt is ranked 7th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 21 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is rated 8.4, while Saviynt is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps writes "Integrates well and helps us in protecting sensitive information, but takes time to scan and apply the policies and cannot detect everything we need". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Saviynt writes "Used for IAM, IGA, MFA, SSO, and access management". Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is most compared with Zscaler Internet Access, Cisco Umbrella, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and FortiSASE , whereas Saviynt is most compared with SailPoint Identity Security Cloud, Microsoft Entra ID, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Okta Workforce Identity and Microsoft Identity Manager. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Saviynt report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.
