We performed a comparison between CloudCheckr and Microsoft Defender for Cloud 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."
"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."
"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."
"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."
"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."
"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."
"Most importantly, it's an integrated solution. We not only have Defender for Cloud, but we also have Defender for Endpoint, Defender for Office 365, and Defender for Identity. It's an integrated, holistic solution."
"The first valuable feature was the fact that it gave us a list of everything that users were surfing on the web. Having the list, we could make decisions about those sites."
"The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents."
"The most valuable feature is that it's intuitive. It's very intuitive."
"The solution's robust security posture is the most valuable feature."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the insights, meaning the remediation suggestions, as well as the incident alerts."
"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."
"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."
"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 performance of the tool really needs to be improved."
"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."
"The solution must improve its user interface."
"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."
"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."
"When you work with it, the only problem that we're struggling with is that we have 21 different subscriptions we're trying to apply security to. It's impossible to keep everything organized."
"Azure is a complex solution. You have so many moving parts."
"The most significant areas for improvement are in the security of our identity and endpoints and the posture of the cloud environment. Better protection for our cloud users and cloud apps is always welcome."
"Microsoft Defender could be more centralized. For example, I still need to go to another console to do policy management."
"Consistency is the area where the most improvement is needed. For example, there are some areas where the UI is not uniform across the board."
"The remediation process could be improved."
"I would like to have the ability to customize executive reporting."
"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."
CloudCheckr is ranked 24th in Cloud Management with 8 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 2nd in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 46 reviews. CloudCheckr is rated 7.6, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud 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 Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". 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 Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Wiz and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our CloudCheckr vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud report.
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.
