Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs Qualys VMDR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
106
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (3rd)
Aqua Cloud Security Platform
Ranking in Container Security
18th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (12th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (15th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (14th), Software Supply Chain Security (2nd), DevSecOps (9th)
Qualys VMDR
Ranking in Container Security
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
IT Asset Management (5th), Vulnerability Management (3rd), Configuration Management Databases (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Aqua Cloud Security Platform is 4.3%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys VMDR is 3.0%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.
Burak AKCAGUN - PeerSpot reviewer
A robust and cost-effective solution, excelling in scalability, on-premises support, and responsive technical support, making it well-suited for enterprises navigating stringent regulatory environment
The most crucial aspect is runtime protection, specifically image scanning before preproduction and deployment. Customers find it invaluable to have the ability to check for vulnerabilities in an image before deployment, similar to a sandbox environment. This feature ensures that customers can identify any potential issues with the image, such as misconfigurations or vulnerabilities, before integrating it into their workloads and infrastructure. In their source pipeline, companies can identify issues before deploying changes. This is crucial because customers prefer resolving any problems or misconfigurations before the deployment process. Software change security, including GSPM Cloud, is a key feature customers seek in their infrastructure.
Harold Jensen - PeerSpot reviewer
Good visibility but expensive and needs better support
Support: It's often overseas and often following a script, basically asking us to redo what we opened the case with. Multiple APIs: There seems to be a lack of easy onboarding into Qualys. We had to use manual inputs and some API calls to get items in place. Dashboard: It is very rudimentary with very little customization. The Qualys Scripting Language (QSL) works differently in different Qualys modules, so when you get it working in one area you have to modify the syntax in others. User account management: We often have to give users more rights than needed just to give them what they need. Integration with the various Qualys Modules: You can tell the UI is different based on of the different teams that created them. QSL syntax same in all modules Responsiveness of some of the components: They time out, you get a blank screen, etc. Backend updates between the various modules: You update connectors and information takes a few minutes to show in VMDR or Global Asset View Connectors: Connectors have a throttling issue with AWS which causes them to frequently fail unless you manually run them again.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The UI is very good."
"The cooperative nature of SentinelOne has influenced our decision not to shift."
"They're responsive to feature requests. If I suggest a feature for Prisma, I will need to wait until the next release on their roadmap. Cloud Native Security will add it right away."
"I would definitely recommend SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security for infrastructure security."
"SentinelOne's behaviour analytics are valuable because they detect anomalies and malicious behaviour that signature-based solutions might miss."
"The tool identifies issues quickly."
"I recommend SentinelOne due to its high-security capabilities, which are essential to safeguard data and systems from potential threats."
"Singularity Cloud Native Security provides us with a platform to scan instances when they are getting created, and the dashboard helps us to identify the critical issues."
"The most helpful feature of Aqua Security is Drift Prevention, which is a feature that allows images to be immutable. In addition, one of the main reasons we went with Aqua Security is because it provides strong protection when it comes to runtime security."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"The container security element of this product has been very valuable to our organization."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"Aqua Security allowed us to gain visibility into the vulnerabilities that were present in the container images, that were being rolled out, the amount of risk that we were introducing to the platform, and provided us a look into the container environment by introducing access control mechanisms. In addition, when it came to runtime-level policies, we could restrict container access to resources in our environment, such as network-level or other application-level access."
"Aqua Security helps us to check the vulnerability of image assurance and check for malware."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to run different capabilities with the same agent. With only one agent, we can have EDR, vulnerability management, compliance and some basic SaaS security capabilities."
"The Vulnerability Management and Patch Management features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"I find the most valuable features are the continuous monitoring. Even on premises, there is constant monitoring."
"I find the solution's dashboard interesting...The response time is fine. You can pull up reports without dragging or consuming bandwidth."
"There are many features. Its reliability, ease of installation, ease of use, and the richness of the information provided are the most valuable features."
"It's stable and quite reliable."
"I value the scheduling of scans and reports as per the desired timeframes."
"I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagging system is good for tagging. We can still use QualysAgent task ID tools even if tags aren't made."
 

Cons

"If something happens in our infrastructure, the alert appears on the dashboard, but I have to log in to the dashboard and refresh it. I would prefer it to provide better alerting and notifications so that I can resolve issues on priority."
"The documentation could be better."
"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for PingSafe."
"We repeatedly get alerts on the tool dashboard that we've already solved on our end, but they still appear. That is somewhat irritating."
"There can be a specific type of alert showing that a new type of risk has been identified."
"The areas with room for improvement include the cost, which is higher compared to other security platforms. The dashboard can also be laggy."
"Sometimes I got stressed with the UI."
"The user interface could be improved, especially in terms of organization and clarity."
"Since we are working from home, we would like to have the proper training for Aqua."
"The integrations on CICD could be improved. If Aqua had more plugins or container images to integrate and automate more easily on CICD, it would be better."
"They want to release improvements to their product to work with other servers because now there are more focused on the Kubernetes environment. They need to improve the normal servers. I would like to have more options."
"In the next release, Aqua Security should add the ability to automatically send reports to customers."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"The solution could improve user-friendliness."
"Qualys VMDR should improve authenticated scanning capabilities."
"The disadvantage of working with Qualys is that the graphical interface is quite outdated."
"There seems to be a lack of easy onboarding into Qualys."
"We are moving away from Qualys to Defender ATP because I find that Defender ATP is much better at prioritizing the vulnerabilities that I should be looking at."
"Qualys VM should improve its methodology."
"I would like to see more accuracy in detections, better reporting capabilities, and better dashboard download capabilities."
"Reports were lacking somewhat on the customization side."
"It would be helpful to have features for better tracking, including options for adding relevant owners or supporting groups for each asset."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingSafe is cost-effective for the amount of infrastructure we have. It's reasonable for what they offer compared to our previous solution. It's at least 25 percent to 30 percent less."
"PingSafe is affordable."
"Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne is cost-efficient."
"PingSafe falls within the typical price range for cloud security platforms."
"I understand that SentinelOne is a market leader, but the bill we received was astronomical."
"Its pricing is okay. It is in line with what other providers were providing. It is not cheap. It is not expensive."
"PingSafe is fairly priced."
"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"They were reasonable with their pricing. They were pretty down-to-earth about the way they pitched their product and the way they tried to close the deal. They were one of the rare companies that approached the whole valuation in a way that made sense for our company, for our needs, and for their own requirements as well... They will accommodate your needs if they are able to understand them and they're stated clearly."
"The pricing of this solution could be improved."
"It comes at a reasonable cost."
"Aqua Security is not cheap, and it's not very expensive, such as Splunk, they are in the middle."
"Dealing with licensing costs isn't my responsibility, but I know that the licenses don't depend on the number of users, but instead are priced according to your workload."
"The price is very reasonable."
"Qualys VM is better suited for medium to large companies because the price can be too much for smaller customers."
"Qualys VM is quite expensive. It's a subscription-based license, and it's yearly. Right now, it's open for me, and I don't have any limitations or caps on the licenses. They are seeing if the product is viable for 4500 users. I can add as much as I want, and at the end of the subscription, they'll let me know how many licenses were actually used and bill me accordingly. On a scale from one to five, I would give their pricing a three. It's still expensive."
"The product is more expensive than that of any other vendor."
"It's very expensive, especially if you want to use multiple modules of Qualys."
"It is a high cost product. Compared to the other solutions, it is around 15 to 20% higher in cost."
"We have an annual contract for Qualys VMDR. I believe it's for either two years or five years."
"It is more expensive than other products on the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
842,010 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
Educational Organization
37%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
In version 2, a lot of rules have been deployed for Kubernetes security and CDR, which makes a lot of issues of criti...
What do you think of Aqua Security vs Prisma Cloud?
Aqua Security is easy to use and very manageable. Its main focus is on Kubernetes and Docker. Security is a very valu...
What do you like most about Aqua Security?
Customers find it invaluable to have the ability to check for vulnerabilities in an image before deployment, similar ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aqua Security?
It comes at a reasonable cost. When compared to Prisma Cloud, it is more budget-friendly.
What do you like most about Qualys VMDR?
I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagg...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys VMDR?
For smaller enterprises, the pricing is on the pricier side. However, for larger enterprises, it's considered okay. I...
What needs improvement with Qualys VMDR?
Regarding improvement, compliance features haven't been utilized much. I anticipate more benefits in this area in the...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Aqua Security Platform, CloudSploit, Argon
Qualys VM, QualysGuard VM, Qualys Asset Inventory, Qualys Container Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
HPE Salesforce Telstra Ellie Mae Cathay Pacific HomeAway
Agrokor Group, American Specialty Health, American State Bank, Arval, Life:), Axway, Bank of the West, Blueport Commerce, BSkyB, Brinks, CaixaBank, Cartagena, Catholic Health System, CEC Bank, Cegedim, CIGNA, Clickability, Colby-Sawyer College, Commercial Bank of Dubai, University of Utah, eBay Inc., ING Singapore, National Theatre, OTP Bank, Sodexo, WebEx
Find out what your peers are saying about Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs. Qualys VMDR and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,010 professionals have used our research since 2012.