We performed a comparison between CloudCheckr and CloudStack 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."The solution is mostly stable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."
"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."
"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."
"The solution is scalable for our purposes."
"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."
"Killer features for me were: support for many hypervisors, ability to match business logic, "everything in one box," available APIs."
"You can manage infrastructure with a few people, since product is monolithic. We had three engineers (storage, virtual, Linux admins) only. Also, CS supports different flavours of hypervisors."
"It gives us the ability to manage and segregate a guest network with openvSwitch and VLAN IDs."
"CloudStack helped us showcase our features through process visualization and functional solutions."
"It was easy to deploy, both for PoC and production (with HA)."
"It works, and pretty much always has. Reliability and support for enterprise features, with a multi-tenant interface, makes CloudStack a very compelling solution."
"It is very easy to install and manage. It has the all modules in one node, unlike other software (OpenStack). The product allows a customized look and feel, and the ability to add custom workflows."
"Multiple types of hypervisor support, multi-zone support, and VPC are great valuable features."
"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."
"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."
"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"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."
"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."
"I encountered some stability issues. When I tried to remove high-capacity virtual machines it took a long time to update, and sometimes the VM status failed to update properly in the cloud database. This occurred multiple times, even though I had sufficient resources."
"The area of improvement could be the regionalization aspect. For example, managing multiple regions or HubStack deployments together was not thought out thoroughly in the versions I used. We faced issues around managing the global infrastructure and had to develop around it."
"CS has very descriptive logging, and every time I faced issues and asked for help, I didn’t get any reply from the community. Reason? Its quite obvious. CS runs on specific environments, unique to each case. So, unless it is a functional issue of CS, nobody can help you. All issues were resolved by myself going through logs. This is another reason why you need smart enough people to manage it. Engineers must have knowledge of hypervisors and understand how CS interacts with them."
"For time consuming operations like storage migrations, volume Snapshot restore and the like, we faced issues like MySQL operations timing out and status update failures. Those areas needs improvement."
"Companies need to be knowledgeable about cloud technology. It's not for novice users."
"A technology upgrade is one item which could be improved upon a lot."
"The main reason why we started looking for another solution: backups, replication, HA, and dependency on secondary storage. CS is quite sensitive for infrastructure, and any kind of network disruption between CS and secondary storage leads to VM hanging."
"The number of contributors to this solution is relatively small compared to other solutions. However, if more frequent users of CloudStack contribute to the open-source community, it will significantly enhance the overall community experience and make it more useful for everyone involved."
CloudCheckr is ranked 24th in Cloud Management with 8 reviews while CloudStack is ranked 12th in Cloud Management with 29 reviews. CloudCheckr is rated 7.6, while CloudStack is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CloudCheckr writes "Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CloudStack writes "A solution that strikes a balance between user-friendliness, scalability, and stability". CloudCheckr is most compared with Azure Cost Management, AWS Trusted Advisor, Apptio One, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, whereas CloudStack is most compared with OpenNebula, vCloud Director, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), Sangfor HCI - Hyper Converged Infrastructure and VMware Aria Automation. See our CloudCheckr vs. CloudStack 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.
