We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and Microsoft Defender for Cloud 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 includes regulatory compliance, ransomware protection, and UEBA, while Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides granular level reports, governance and administration portal panel, and comprehensive security features for data governance. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has room for improvement in consistency, customization, automation, and integration, while Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management needs expanded reporting options, reduced price, and better integration with third-party software.
Service and Support: Both Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management have received mixed reviews for their customer service, with some users reporting positive experiences and others facing frustration or stating that technical support needs improvement.
Ease of Deployment: Microsoft Defender for Cloud is easy to set up and does not require infrastructure deployment, while Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management may be more complicated and require vendor support or multiple administrators. Both solutions are user-friendly.
Pricing: Microsoft Defender for Cloud offers a range of license options with varying metrics, while Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management's pricing is based on the size of the cloud infrastructure. Check Point's setup cost is affordable and easy, but some reviewers express concern that Microsoft Defender for Cloud may be too costly for small or startup businesses.
ROI: Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides basic security features that may or may not provide a good ROI depending on the company's needs. On the other hand, Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management offers a high ROI growth rate along with essential compliance and asset protection.
Comparison Results: Users prefer Microsoft Defender for Cloud over Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management due to its valuable features such as regulatory compliance, ransomware protection, and access controls. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is also more automated and easier to use, with incident alerts and collaborative services.
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"The vulnerability management modules and the discovery and inventory are the most valuable features. Before using Wiz, it was a very manual process for both. After implementing it, we're able to get all of the analytics into a single platform that gives us visibility across all the systems in our cloud. We're able to correspond and understand what the vulnerability landscape looks like a lot faster."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"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."
"With Wiz, we get timely alerts for leaked data or any vulnerabilities already existing in our environment."
"The automation roles are essential because we ultimately want to do less work and automate more. The dashboards are easy to read and visually pleasing. You can understand things quickly, which makes it easy for our other teams. The network and infrastructure teams don't know as much about security as we do, so it helps to have a tool that's accessible and nice to look at."
"The various CNAPP modules have granted more visibility of our cloud applications to our system engineers and developers."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is the training."
"The feature that I value the most about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is the possibility of checking compliance with different standards. This compliance check can be performed for each subscription or service that we have on all the different cloud providers that we use."
"The product enables us to check the information that goes out of the company."
"The tool is also very intuitive; its dashboards are very complete and provide a lot of valuable information for decision-making to improve security."
"The ability to integrate it with Microsoft Azure Sentinel allows us to validate the logs in an even more complex and meaningful way."
"It provides the most useful tools for protecting our financial account records from hackers."
"The visibility in our cloud environment is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are ransomware protection and access controls. The solution has helped us secure some folders on our systems from unauthorized modifications."
"Defender for Cloud is a plug-and-play solution that provides continuous posture management once enabled."
"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."
"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."
"The main feature is the security posture assessment through the security score. I find that to be very helpful because it gives us guidance on what needs to be secured and recommendations on how to secure the workloads that have been onboarded."
"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."
"Everything is built into Azure, and if we go for cross-cloud development with Azure Arc, we can use most of the features. While it's possible to deploy and convert third-party applications, it is difficult to maintain, whereas Azure deployments to the cloud are always easier. Also, Microsoft is a big company, so they always provide enough support, and we trust the Microsoft brand."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the vulnerability assessments and the glossary of compliance."
"The only small pain point has been around some of the logging integrations. Some of the complexities of the script integrations aren't supported with some of the more automated infrastructure components. So, it's not as universal. For example, they have great support for cloud formation and other services, but if you're using another type of management utility or governance language for your infrastructure-as-code automation components, it becomes a little bit trickier to navigate that."
"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 remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"One significant issue is that the searches are case-sensitive, so finding a misconfigured resource can become very challenging."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product."
"The false positives can be annoying at times."
"They take time to respond or coordinate a meeting since they maintain a schedule that does not fit Latin America very well."
"Reporting should have more options."
"Currently, worldwide, there are many companies of all sizes that do not understand the value that their data has, but even with all existing clouds, they also do not understand what the shared responsibility model is. They only assume that by having a cloud, the provider must ensure safety, when the truth is that the providers only secure their sites. Everything we do in the cloud and how we configure it is actually our responsibility."
"We have had some issues with the performance. In some cases, the performance of CloudGuard CNAPP is impacted. Particularly during the intensive security scans in high-traffic environments, there has been a performance impact."
"I am not a technical person, but generically, the user interface can be a little more intuitive. Our staff has trained network security and cloud security professionals, and they get it, but when you are trying to get to the customers to be able to pick it up and maintain it, it can be a bit difficult."
"We have concerns regarding the pricing and would appreciate seeing some improvements."
"If a customer is already using Okta as an SSO in its entire environment, they will want to continue with it. But Security Center doesn't understand that and keeps making recommendations. It would help if it let us resolve a recommendation, even if it is not implemented."
"We would like to have better transparency as to how the security score is calculated because as it is now, it is difficult to understand."
"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."
"Another thing that could be improved was that they could recommend processes on how to react to alerts, or recommend best practices based on how other organizations do things if they receive an alert about XYZ."
"The product must improve its UI."
"Microsoft can improve the pricing by offering a plan that is more cost-effective for small and medium organizations."
"It needs to be simplified and made more user-friendly for a non-technical person."
"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."
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 5th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 63 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 3rd in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 46 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP writes "Threat intel integration provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with suspicious or blacklisted IPs". 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". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, AWS GuardDuty, Qualys VMDR, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Orca Security, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, best Vulnerability Management vendors, and best Container Management vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.
