CloudCheckr vs Cloudability comparison

Apptio and Spot are both solutions in the Cloud Cost Management category. Apptio is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.1, while Spot is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.0. Apptio holds a 13.7% mindshare in CCM, compared to Spot’s 4.0% mindshare. Additionally, 75% of Apptio users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 66% of Spot users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 2025

Cloudability and CloudCheckr are major players in the cloud management sector. Cloudability seems to have an advantage in AWS integration due to its depth in detailed cost analysis and reserved instance planning, while CloudCheckr offers better multi-cloud compatibility, making it appealing for varied cloud environments.

Features: Cloudability offers comprehensive metrics for financial management, reserved instance planning, and customized dashboards. Its integration with AWS is robust, with features such as tagging capabilities and rightsizing recommendations. CloudCheckr excels with strong billing capabilities, security insights, and the ability to scale easily across AWS, Azure, and GCP.

Room for Improvement: Cloudability users suggest enhancements in user onboarding, API documentation, and long-term forecasting. Discrepancies in billing data and automation needs in data handling are noted areas needing attention. It could also broaden its focus to include more cloud providers. CloudCheckr needs performance improvements with large datasets and better integration with Azure and GCP, while its non-AWS security compliance could be enhanced. Reporting and user guidance in both products could be improved.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products provide public cloud support, but only CloudCheckr extends to private clouds. Cloudability's support varies, with some users finding it inconsistent and lacking real-time options. CloudCheckr also receives mixed feedback, particularly outside AWS, requiring active customer engagement for effective support and deployment.

Pricing and ROI: Cloudability is perceived as expensive for large-scale users but can provide significant ROI through cost-saving recommendations, with some users claiming a 9x ROI. Its usage-based pricing model may deter smaller operations. In contrast, CloudCheckr is deemed fairly priced, delivering consistent value adaptable to diverse cloud usage structures. While both offer ROI through predictive analytics and reserved instance savings, Cloudability's cost may limit its appeal to smaller clients, whereas CloudCheckr remains reasonably priced across various scales.

To learn more, read our detailed CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 852,649 peers since 2012

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

IBM Turbonomic

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Cloud Cost Management category, the mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 13.6%, down from 14.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cloudability is 13.7%, up from 10.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CloudCheckr is 4.0%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Cost Management

Featured Reviews

Alex Darby

Director, Infrastructure, Wintel Engineering at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees

Saves time during workload migration, facilitates sizing of virtual servers, and the support team is helpful

The right-sizing feature is the most captivating one for us. It helped in taking the emotions out of what people think they need, basing it off of real data, and providing them what they actually need. It's not really a special feature, but the support that we received from that team really helped us in our success. There were definitely some customizations that needed to take place to make it successful. This is the most aware of our products, in terms of understanding all of the components from the top down. It is integrated with all of the different modules, all the way down to the core infrastructure. All of it is tied together and there are not many tools that can do that.

Read full review

Vijay More

Technical Lead at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Helps to understand and manage spending across clouds, but has dashboard limitations

Cloudability offers valuable insights into data engineering and analytics platforms. With access to the same data Cloudability utilizes, one could recreate similar dashboards on their own data platform. This implies that Cloudability's role could be replaceable with some organizational effort, provided they have the necessary data sources and expertise. However, for organizations looking to streamline processes without investing extensive time, money, and resources into building their solution, Cloudability serves as a convenient option. Moreover, it offers benefits for both single-cloud and multi-cloud users. While it's beneficial for single-cloud users, it becomes particularly advantageous for organizations with multi-cloud environments, as it helps manage costs and optimize resources across different cloud providers.

Read full review

Nigel Mullings

Enterprise Cloud Architect at Peritem Consultants Ltd

Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support

I have worked in the cost-management tools from many cloud providers, such as Amazon AWS, Google Cloud Services, and Azure. CloudCheckr CMx High Security has a lot more detail than the native cloud service cost-management tools. If you want an enterprise-grade solution, CloudCheckr CMx High Security would be a good fit. If you want something simple, out of the box, then you can use the cloud service's native tools.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like."

"The proactive monitoring of all our open enrollment applications has improved our organization. We have used it to size applications that we are moving to the cloud. Therefore, when we move them out there, we have them appropriately sized. We use it for reporting to current application owners, showing them where they are wasting money. There are easy things to find for an application, e.g., they decommissioned the server, but they never took care of the storage. Without a tool like this, that storage would just sit there forever, with us getting billed for it."

"We have VM placement in Automated mode and currently have all other metrics in Recommend mode."

"The system automatically sizes and moves resources based on the needs of the applications."

"I like Turbonomic's automation and AI machine learning features. It shows you what it can do, but it can also act on recommendations automatically. Integration with an APM system makes the AI/ML features truly effective. Understanding what the application is doing and the trends of application behavior can help you make real-world decisions and act on that information."

"I like Turbonomic's built-in reporting. It provides a ton of information out of the box, so I don't have to build panels for the monthly summaries and other reports I need to present to management. We get better performance and bottleneck reporting from this than we do from our older EMC software."

"It helps us get a consolidated view of all customer spending into a single dashboard, allowing us to identify opportunities to improve their current spending."

"The notifications saying, "This is a corrective action," even though some of them can be automated, are always welcome to see. They summarize your entire infrastructure and how you can better utilize it. That is the biggest feature."

More IBM Turbonomic pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to create reports and dashboards."

"It provides us visibility, then we can turn around and can give the leadership team more information, which we could not previously give them."

"Transparency and visibility are the key features."

"The most crucial feature in reducing my cloud costs has been the rightsizing recommendations, along with the dashboards that track reserved instance spending coverage and utilization. As for Cloudability's integration with our existing cloud infrastructure, it's not integrated directly into our AWS infrastructure but rather reads and pulls data from it, providing valuable insights and analysis for cost management."

"Cloudability takes care of identifying and managing the cloud."

"The sizing recommendation will look, and say, "You are only using this at 80%," then recommend a better fit for you."

"Each user can have their own dashboard that they want to consume. Instead of having to share one dashboard for multiple users, you can create individual views for each user to view, and that view will contain only their own accounts, which allows for separation of data."

"One of the standout features of the solution is its groups and views functionality. The solution is highly-stable. The solution is highly-scalable. The customer support is good. They can be easily contacted. The initial setup is straightforward. It's an excellent tool, especially when dealing with multiple clouds. It streamlines the process, eliminating the need to check each cloud individually."

More Cloudability pros

"The solution is mostly stable."

"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."

"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."

"The solution is scalable for our purposes."

"The initial setup is straightforward."

"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'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."

Cons

"While the product is fairly intuitive and easy to use once you learn it, it can be quite daunting until you have undergone a bit of training."

"Turbonomic doesn't do storage placement how I would prefer. We use multiple shared storage volumes on VMware, so I don't have one big disk. I have lots of disks that I can place VMs on, and that consumes IOPS from the disk subsystem. We were getting recommendations to provision a new volume."

"We're still evaluating the solution, so I don't know enough about what I don't know. They've done a lot over the years. I used Turbonomics six or seven years ago before IBM bought them. They've matured a lot since then."

"The old interface was not the clearest UI in some areas, and could be quite intimidating when first using the tool."

"It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines."

"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."

"Turbonomic can modernize the look and feel, making it more user-friendly to access and obtain information."

"We don't use Turbonomic for FinOps and part of the reason is its cost reporting. The reporting could be much more robust and, if that were the case, I could pitch it for FinOps."

More IBM Turbonomic cons

"In general, I feel Cloudability wasn't able to support many resources."

"There are also some limitations with the dashboards and data representation in Cloudability."

"They can improve the custom range of the network."

"I would improve the integration, or the preparation of the integration, for a complex environment."

"I wish there was a feature to temporarily remove certain recommendations from the list for teams that couldn't implement them immediately. I believe Cloudability could improve its automation functionality and enhance cost allocation modeling."

"Cloudability needs to improve on data collection from cloud sources."

"Right now, what we're doing is we are manually putting the data in it, which is something which we don't like about Cloudability."

"The dashboard needs to include more graphs per team to show what individual teams are spending in a given time period."

More Cloudability cons

"The solution must improve its user interface."

"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 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."

"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."

"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."

"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."

"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one server. It's not cost-effective if we have to pay more for those. When I move around a VM SQL box with 30 cores and a half-terabyte of RAM, I'm not paying for an entire socket and cores where people assume you have at least 10 or 20 VMs on that socket for that pricing."

"I know there have been some issues with the billing, when the numbers were first proposed, as to how much we would save. There was a huge miscommunication on our part. Turbonomic was led to believe that we could optimize our AWS footprint, because we didn't know we couldn't. So, we were promised savings of $750,000. Then, when we came to implement Turbonomic, the developers in AWS said, "Absolutely not. You're not putting that in our environment. We can't scale down anything because they coded it." Our AWS environment is a legacy environment. It has all these old applications, where all the developers who have made it are no longer with the company. Those applications generate a ton of money for us. So, if one breaks, we are really in trouble and they didn't want to have to deal with an environment that was changing and couldn't be supported. That number went from $750,000 to about $450,000. However, that wasn't Turbonomic's fault."

"The pricing and licensing are fair. We purchase based on benchmark pricing, which we have been able to get. There are no surprise charges nor hidden fees."

"Everybody tells me the pricing is high. But the ROIs are great."

"Price is a big one. VMTurbo was very competitively priced."

"It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."

"The product is fairly priced right now. Given its capabilities, it is excellently priced. We think that the product will become self-funding because we will be able to maximize our resources, which will help us from a capacity perspective. That should save us money in the long run."

"Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."

More IBM Turbonomic pricing and cost advice

"Cloudability is a bit expensive."

"My team is one of the most expensive teams, and we look at it quite a bit. We have probably easily saved around $400,000 USD a year."

"It justifies the cost and is worth it."

"We have seen ROI with the reserved instances, and having the ability to predict what reserved instances you can get. We can save tens of thousands of dollars, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in some cases."

"The price of the license or the usage is a percentage of the top consumption. So it varies from year to year."

"The solution is reasonably priced."

"A license is needed to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security, but because we are a managed service provider, the price of the license would vary. It depends on the type of cloud users we have, for example, it would be some type of percentage or monthly billing, etc."

"The cost is on par with other providers."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Cost Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

852,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Media Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?

It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Turbonomic?

The implementation could be enhanced.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?

We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting...

See all answers

What do you like most about Cloudability?

The most crucial feature in reducing my cloud costs has been the rightsizing recommendations, along with the dashboar...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cloudability?

I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, where one is very cheap and ten is very expensive. Pricing is one of th...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Cloudability?

The first one is, how to help users, especially practitioners, stick to their commitment plan. For example, how can I...

See all answers

What do you like most about CloudCheckr ?

The recommendation section is pretty helpful.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudCheckr ?

The price depends on the actual Azure consumption and what we feed into it. The cost is on par with other providers.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudCheckr ?

We are not happy with the product’s reporting capabilities. We are planning to change the solution. The security comp...

See all answers

Comparisons

VMware Aria Operations vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 17% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 12% of the time

VMware vSphere vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 8% of the time

Cisco Intersight vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM Turbonomic Competitors

Apptio One vs Cloudability

Compared 28% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs Cloudability

Compared 12% of the time

Harness vs Cloudability

Compared 10% of the time

VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth vs Cloudability

Compared 9% of the time

More Cloudability Competitors

Flexera Cloud Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 20% of the time

Apptio One vs CloudCheckr

Compared 18% of the time

AWS Cost Explorer vs CloudCheckr

Compared 12% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 10% of the time

CloudStack vs CloudCheckr

Compared 9% of the time

More CloudCheckr Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Turbonomic

May 2025

Download IBM Turbonomic product report

Buyer's Guide

Cloudability

May 2025

Download Cloudability product report

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr

May 2025

Download CloudCheckr product report

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager

No data available

CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP

Interactive Demo

IBM

Demo not available

Apptio

Demo not available

Spot

Overview

IBM Turbonomic offers automation, planning, and right-sizing recommendations to streamline resource management, improve efficiencies, and optimize costs across virtualized environments and cloud platforms.

IBM Turbonomic is valued for its capability to optimize resource allocation and monitor virtual environments efficiently. It facilitates automated decision-making in VM sizing, load balancing, and cost optimization for both on-premises and cloud deployments. Users can leverage insights for workload placement, ensure peak performance assurance, and effectively right-size across VMware and Azure. The ongoing transition to HTML5 aims to improve visual and navigational ease, while expanded reporting features are anticipated. Opportunities for improved training, documentation, and integrations enhance platform usability and functionality.

What Are the Key Features?

Automation: Streamlines resource allocation and VM management.
Planning Tools: Supports capacity management and growth projections.
Right-Sizing: Optimizes VM configurations for efficient resource use.
Customizable Dashboards: Provides quick insights into environment health.
Reporting Capabilities: Offers valuable data for informed decision-making.
Cloud Integration: Ensures cost-effective resource utilization.

What Benefits Should Be Looked For?

Performance Enhancement: Improves application performance efficiency.
Cost Reduction: Minimizes operational expenses through optimizations.
Infrastructure Efficiency: Maximizes use of IT infrastructure resources.

In finance, IBM Turbonomic aids in maintaining platform efficiency during market fluctuations. Healthcare organizations leverage its capability for resource optimization during high-demand periods to enhance patient care support. Retailers use it for planning in peak seasons, ensuring resources align with fluctuating demand to maintain performance continuity.

IBM

Cloudability is a financial management tool for monitoring and analyzing every cloud expense across any organization. It brings transparency to how and where organizations spend money on cloud resources, giving them the power to reap the most value from cloud usage possible. It aggregates expenditures into accessible and comprehensive reports, helps identify new opportunities for reducing spend and increasing cloud efficiency, offers budget alerts and recommendations via SMS and email, provides APIs for connecting cloud billing and usage data to any business or financial system, and more.

Apptio

CloudCheckr CMx High Security is a cloud management platform that provides complete visibility into cost and security issues. The primary use cases are day-to-day operations, cloud management, identifying open vulnerabilities and issues from a security perspective, and cost management and optimization.

The solution is praised for its stability, simplicity, ease of use, scalability, excellent technical support, and granular reporting. CloudCheckr CMx High Security provides priority-level data on security issues and vulnerabilities, making it easy to identify critical issues that need immediate attention.

Spot

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.

Adobe, Uber, Pega, imgur, Pixable, Blackboard, Keboola, Avalara

Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability

April 2025

Free Report: CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability

Find out what your peers are saying about CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

852,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability report.

See our list of best Cloud Cost Management vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Cost 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.