We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Trend Micro Cloud One based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Microsoft Defender for Cloud focuses on regulatory compliance, ransomware protection, and UEBA while Trend Micro Cloud One provides excellent vulnerability protection, login inspection, and container security. Microsoft Defender needs better consistency, customization, integration, and collaboration, as well as wider resource coverage and more intuitive features. On the other hand, Trend Micro Cloud One needs improvements in pricing, automation, setup, licensing, and marketing documentation.
Service and Support: Users have had varying experiences with Microsoft Defender for Cloud's customer service, with some encountering delays and challenges in accessing appropriate support. Conversely, Trend Micro Cloud One is largely praised for their support team's expertise and helpfulness.
Ease of Deployment: Microsoft Defender for Cloud has a simple and quick setup process with minimal maintenance, while Trend Micro Cloud One's setup process is mixed and may require a team for optimal performance.
Pricing: Microsoft Defender for Cloud is seen as cost-effective compared to other products, while Trend Micro Cloud One is in the middle range. Trend Micro Cloud One also has additional services that can be paid for separately, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is bundled with other Microsoft solutions.
ROI: Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a cost-effective choice that improves security and saves time. On the other hand, Trend Micro Cloud One is flexible, but the ROI is not as clear-cut.
Comparison Results: Users prefer Microsoft Defender for Cloud over Trend Micro Cloud One due to its comprehensive features, ease of use, and cost-effectiveness. Microsoft Defender for Cloud offers regulatory compliance, ransomware protection, access controls, incident alerts, and collaborative services. Trend Micro Cloud One offers useful features but is criticized for its high pricing, lack of automation, and complex initial setup.
"The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"With Wiz, we get timely alerts for leaked data or any vulnerabilities already existing in our environment."
"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 solution is very user-friendly."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"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 vulnerability reporting is helpful. When we initially deployed Defender, it reported many more threats than we currently see. It gave us insight into areas we had not previously considered, so we knew where we needed to act."
"One important security feature is the incident alerts. Now, with all these cyberattacks, there are a lot of incident alerts that get triggered. It is very difficult to keep monitoring everything automatically, instead our organization is utilizing the automated use case that we get from Microsoft. That has helped bring down the manual work for a lot of things."
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the remote workforce capabilities and the general experience of the remote workforce."
"The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative."
"It works seamlessly on the Azure platform because it's a Microsoft app. Its setup is similar, so if you already have a Microsoft account, it just flows into it."
"The technical support is very good."
"When you have commissioned Defender, you have these things visible already on your dashboard. This gives the efficiency to the people to do their actual work rather than bothering about the email, sorting out the email, or looking at it through an ITSM solution, whey they have to look at the description and use cases. Efficiency increases with this optimized, ready-made solution since you don't need to invest in something externally. You can start using the dashboard and auditing capability provided from day one. Thus, you have fewer costs with a more optimized, easier-to-use solution, providing operational efficiency for your team."
"Detection response and cloud conformity are valuable features."
"Vision One is versatile and can be integrated with many SIEMs. You're not limited to only one SIEM, such as Microsoft Sentinel. The API integrations are seamless, and we have all the documentation needed to integrate Vision One via API."
"I really like Trend Vision One - Cloud Security's dashboard."
"Trend Vision One - Cloud Security does not utilize a lot of resources which allows our users to keep working even during a scan."
"The storage and computing features are valuable."
"The tech support is excellent. They really know their products. They also know a lot of about the integrations between different solutions."
"The most valuable features are intrusion prevention and anti-malware capabilities."
"The most valuable part of Trend Vision One - Cloud Security is its dashboard, as it's simple. It's easy to manage, and you can better control the solution."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"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."
"Given the level of visibility into all the cloud environments Wiz provides, it would be nice if they could integrate some kind of mechanism to better manage tenants on multiple platforms. For example, let's say that some servers don't have an application they need, such as an antivirus. Wiz could include an API or something to push those applications out to the servers. It would be great if you could remedy these issues directly from the Wiz platform."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"Microsoft sources most of their threat intelligence internally, but I think they should open themselves up to bodies that provide feel intelligence to build a better engine. There may be threats out there that they don't report because their team is not doing anything on that and they don't have arrangements with another party that is involved in that research."
"I felt that there was disconnection in terms of understanding the UI. The communication for moving from the old UI to the new UI could be improved. It was a bit awkward."
"The solution is quite complex. A lot of the different policies that actually get applied don't pertain to every client. If you need to have something open for a client application to work, then you get dinged for having a port open or having an older version of TLS available."
"I would like to see better automation when it comes to pushing out security features to the recommendations, and better documentation on the step-by-step procedures for enabling certain features."
"The product must improve its UI."
"Azure Security Center takes a long time to update, compared to the on-premises version of Microsoft Defender."
"The solution's portal is very easy to use, but there's one key component that is missing when it comes to managing policies. For example, if I've onboarded my server and I need to specify antivirus policies, there's no option to do that on the portal. I will have to go to Intune to deploy them. That is one main aspect that is missing and it's worrisome."
"There is no perfect product in the world and there are always features that can be added."
"There are also some loopholes because it's a new product that they have recently migrated to the cloud. We do see some issues with the policies we have assigned when it comes to a particular account. There are some issues with system support, such as a particular server kernel version that is not supported."
"The workbook insights generate a massive list, making it inconvenient to review."
"The firewall configuration should have been automated based on the understanding of the application, utilities, and protocols."
"The initial setup is easy for someone who operates container platforms on a daily basis. However, it could be difficult for those coming purely from informational security or another field of an IT."
"The local agent should be able to show more logs. At present, the logs are only available from the web console and not from the local agent."
"The dashboard should be a bit more intuitive."
"One area for improvement in Trend Vision One - Cloud Security is marketing; in particular, Trend Vision should update the marketing documentation. The information needs to be more comprehensive."
"The initial setup can be complex for the inexperienced."
More Trend Vision One - Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 3rd in Container Security with 46 reviews while Trend Vision One - Cloud Security is ranked 7th in Container Security with 17 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0, while Trend Vision One - Cloud Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Vision One - Cloud Security writes "We can quickly deploy cloud conformity, provides good visibility, and control". Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Orca Security, whereas Trend Vision One - Cloud Security is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Orca Security and AWS Security Hub. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Trend Vision One - Cloud Security report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors, best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, and best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) 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.
