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

Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 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

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
27th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (6th)
Arctic Wolf Managed Risk
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
28th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (11th)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Container Management (9th), Container Security (4th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (3rd), Microsoft Security Suite (4th), Compliance Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.4%. The mindshare of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is 1.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 5.6%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
Jared Kruger - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps to conduct vulnerability scans but needs to add more integrations
There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you to scan and patch the vulnerabilities. Any 50-member or small company that has an IT footprint carries risk from a cybersecurity perspective. These companies use tools but don't have the talent to leverage them.
Vibhor Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
A single tool for complete visibility and addressing security gaps
Currently, issues are structured in Microsoft Defender for Cloud at severity levels of high, critical, or warning, but these severity levels are not always right. For example, Microsoft might consider a port being open as critical, but that might not be the case for our company. Similarly, it might suggest closing some management ports, but you might need them to be able to log in, so the severity levels for certain things can be improved. Even though Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a way to temporarily disable certain alerts or notifications without affecting our security score, it would be better to have more granularized control over these recommendations. Currently, we cannot even disable certain alerts or notifications. There should be an automated mechanism to design Azure policies based on the recommendations, possibly with AI integration. Instead of an engineer having to write a policy to fix security gaps, which is very time-consuming, there should be an inbuilt capability to auto-remediate everything and have proper control in place. Additionally, enabling Defender for Cloud at the resource group level, rather than only at the subscription level, would be beneficial.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"This solution has made huge strides in improving the awareness of our end users."
"The reporting is really good from what I've seen so far."
"The customer support is incredible."
"I appreciate the professionalism of the tool and have faith in the results it delivers."
"There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you to scan and patch the vulnerabilities. Any 50-member or small company that has an IT footprint carries risk from a cybersecurity perspective. These companies use tools but don't have the talent to leverage them."
"The most valuable feature of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is being informed about what vulnerabilities there are exposed currently."
"We have a patch management solution that scans for any patches that can be applied and then applies these patches, but it doesn't hit everything. It also doesn't find all misconfigurations and things like that. Arctic Wolf Managed Risk kind of fills in the gaps and makes us aware of vulnerabilities or misconfigurations that exist out there. It does an agent scan for software versions and compares them to what CVs are out there and lets us know."
"We get access to quarterly reviews with their team."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud helps in improving our overall security posture. We have a nice overview of what is missing where and what can be improved."
"The most valuable feature is the hunting feature, which integrates well into the entire Microsoft ecosystem."
"Microsoft Defender has a lot of features including regulatory compliance and attaching workbooks but the most valuable is the recommendations it provides for each and every resource when we open Microsoft Defender."
"I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a nine out of 10."
"Provides a very good view of the entire security setup of your organization."
"It is very intuitive when it comes to policy administration, alerts and notifications, and ease of setting up roles at different hierarchies. It has also been good in terms of the network technology maps. It provides a good overview, but it also depends on the complexity of your network."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud has made our environment more secure."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is stable and reliable as advertised."
 

Cons

"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."
"The major area for improvement is the lack of a patch management feature to resolve some of the vulnerabilities detected."
"Arctic Wolf Managed Risk needs to add more integrations."
"As far as the product is concerned, I would really like the scanning feature to let us know that a threat has been addressed once we apply the relevant patch. We are not seeing this currently when running a scan."
"The major area for improvement is the lack of a patch management feature to resolve some of the vulnerabilities detected."
"The presentation of the data could be improved. I believe they have significant room for improvement, particularly in making better analysis of the vulnerability data and presenting those data more effectively."
"The best way to take this product to the next level would be to implement a patch management solution."
"The scalability could improve."
"It could be easier to use. They could present things in a little bit more ranked order rather than kind of giving you everything out there. It should highlight the really important stuff and make it easier to get to good rather than perfect."
"Defender is occasionally unreliable. It isn't 100% efficient in terms of antivirus detection, but it isn't an issue most of the time. It's also somewhat difficult to train new security analysts to use Defender."
"The pricing could be better."
"With the new Copilot functionality available everywhere, it is challenging to pinpoint areas for improvement. If I put in a lot of thought, I might identify things, but right now, nothing significant pops into my mind, but there is always room for more transparency, especially in pricing."
"Microsoft Graph needs improvement."
"Microsoft Graph needs improvement."
"Customizing some of the compliance requirements based on individual needs seems like the biggest area of improvement. There should be an option to turn specific controls on and off based on how your solution is configured."
"Azure is a complex solution. You have so many moving parts."
"I recommend that they extend the scope for legacy infra assets."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonably priced and I rate it a four out of ten."
"It depends on the company size quite a bit."
"The price of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonable compared to the competition."
"Although I am outside of the discussion on budget and costing, I can say that the importance of security provided by this solution is of such importance that whatever the cost is, it is not a factor."
"Azure Defender is definitely pricey, but their competitors cost about the same. For example, a Palo Alto solution is the same price per endpoint, but the ground strikes cost a bit more than Azure Defender. Still, it's pricey for a company like ours. Maybe well-established organizations can afford it, but it might be too costly for a startup."
"Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"The pricing and licensing of Microsoft Defender for Cloud have been good for us. We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license."
"Microsoft's licensing and pricing are sometimes complicated. If someone is new to Microsoft's licensing, they might have difficulty with it."
"The product's pricing policy is generally favorable."
"Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."
"The pricing model for most plans is generally good, but the cost of the new Defender for Storage plan is high and should be revisited, as it could lead to disabling desirable security features due to cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
6%
University
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Educational Organization
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
I find that the pricing for Zafran aligns well with the comprehensive features it offers. The asset and user-based li...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
While Zafran Security is already a powerful tool, there are areas where it could be further improved to provide even ...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
Our primary use case for Zafran involves leveraging it to enhance our vulnerability risk scoring methodology. In toda...
What do you like most about Arctic Wolf Managed Risk?
There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you t...
What needs improvement with Arctic Wolf Managed Risk?
The presentation of the data could be improved. I believe they have significant room for improvement, particularly in...
How is Prisma Cloud vs Azure Security Center for security?
Azure Security Center is very easy to use, integrates well, and gives very good visibility on what is happening acros...
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
Initially, the cost was reasonable, but additional services from Microsoft sometimes incur extra expenses that seem h...
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Zelle LLP, DNI Corp, Roper Pump, Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.