We performed a comparison between AWS Control Tower and CloudCheckr based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There are two features in Control Tower which are the most valuable. One is the guardrails because it has preventive and detective guardrails."
"The solution's initial setup was easy for me."
"AWS Control Tower helps to save a lot of work and manage multiple accounts."
"The most significant benefit of Control Tower is its capability to align with our organization's standards."
"One of the standout advantages is the fine-grained control it offers in terms of permissions and privileges."
"It offers automated recommendations for security and policies, creating a landing zone and providing a list of policies."
"With Control Tower, there are ready-to-use automated templates available, simplifying the implementation of a centralized management solution."
"Security is the most valuable feature of Control Tower."
"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."
"The solution is scalable for our purposes."
"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."
"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."
"The best feature I like about CloudCheckr CMx High Security is its simplicity. I love that it's not rocket science to use the solution. Even if you're not familiar with the cloud, you can easily figure out how to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You can use AWS, you can use Azure, and you can use GCP with the solution because the integration is quite simple. You can also use multi-cloud with it, and you could see the billing part. You'll have complete visibility into your cost which I love about the solution. I also love that data on any security issues and vulnerabilities are available on the go with CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You don't need to do anything different. Just run the scan and you'll have all these open findings in the tool, in terms of the priority level, so if it's critical, it will tell you, "It's critical," and you need to fix it right away."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"The solution is mostly stable."
"The process of closing an AWS account using Control Tower needs improvements to simplify it, especially when managing multiple accounts."
"There should be more automation security tools in the Control Tower."
"The initial setup is complex."
"It would be beneficial if AWS offered the capability to seamlessly deploy your infrastructure to another region to ensure continuous availability and redundancy."
"The integration with other AWS functions has room for improvement."
"It is essential to clarify that this isn't necessarily a drawback of the service, but having a clear and concise set of predefined guidelines from AWS for moving existing accounts under AWS Control Tower would be highly beneficial as it would simplify the process and make it more user-friendly."
"There aren't any additional features that I feel are missing. However, it's worth noting that Control Tower seems to function as a layer utilizing standard AWS products in the background. Occasionally, the interface may appear less streamlined, with changes in layout based on the underlying products being used. While this doesn't impact functionality, having a more standardized user interface, irrespective of the background products, could enhance the user experience."
"The sole drawback is its restriction to enable only one Control Tower."
"What needs to be improved in CloudCheckr CMx High Security is integration. All the clouds are going quite fast, for example, all the cloud providers: Microsoft, Google, etc. CloudCheckr CMx High Security is good with AWS, no doubt about it, but with Azure and Google Cloud, I find that the solution is slow in that direction. If the vendor planned for CloudCheckr CMx High Security to be automated just for AWS, then it does make sense. If not, if the vendor is also targeting good integration with Google and Microsoft, then CloudCheckr CMx High Security integration needs improvement, in particular, it has to be faster. At the moment, its integration with Azure is not as good as its integration with AWS. With GCP, integration is nowhere."
"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."
"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."
"CloudCheckr CMx High Security is complex. There are a lot of menus, and if you do not know what you are looking for you can get lost. However, the interface is self-explanatory. It's easy to understand where to go to get what you want."
"The solution must improve its user interface."
AWS Control Tower is ranked 11th in Cloud Management with 15 reviews while CloudCheckr is ranked 24th in Cloud Management with 8 reviews. AWS Control Tower is rated 8.2, while CloudCheckr is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AWS Control Tower writes "A robust protection for efficient cloud governance and security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CloudCheckr writes "Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support". AWS Control Tower is most compared with AWS Trusted Advisor, Oracle Enterprise Manager Cloud Control, VMware Aria Automation and Morpheus, whereas CloudCheckr is most compared with Azure Cost Management, AWS Trusted Advisor, Apptio One, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Cloudability. See our AWS Control Tower vs. CloudCheckr report.
See our list of best Cloud Management vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Management 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.
