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

Imperva Data Security vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 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

Imperva Data Security
Ranking in Data Security Posture Management (DSPM)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Data Security Posture Management (DSPM)
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (8th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) category, the mindshare of Imperva Data Security is 1.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 12.4%, down from 14.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Security Posture Management (DSPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Samuel Adeyemi - PeerSpot reviewer
Real-time data monitoring and policy-based activity blocking enhance security and awareness
The development mode on the platform needs improvement. For example, the archiving functionalities should be enhanced to allow easy conversion of archived logs into CSV or Excel formats for data analysis. When I need to investigate with archived data, the inability to export to these formats can be limiting. Making this process easier would be beneficial for reviews.
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

"The most valuable features include a great level of automation, machine learning for attack validation, and a very flexible and comfortable management console."
"I recommend the product to other users."
"If something malicious occurs, I can set a policy to block it, review the action, and decide whether to release it if it's found not to be malicious."
"The benefits are operational. The outcome comes from preventing an attack on the organization. On the operational side, you generally have good, decent security measures for your application, database, and digital assets."
"The time to detect vulnerabilities has gotten a lot quicker."
"It helps you to identify the gaps in your solution and remediate them. It produces a compliance checklist against known standards such as ISO 27001, HIPAA, iTrust, etc."
"It works seamlessly on the Azure platform because it's a Microsoft app. Its setup is similar, so if you already have a Microsoft account, it just flows into it."
"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 solution is up-to-date with the latest updates and identified threats."
"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 solution's robust security posture is the most valuable feature."
"Defender lets you orchestrate the roll-out from a single pane. Using the Azure portal, you can roll it out over all the servers covered by the entire subscription."
"Defender is user-friendly and provides decent visibility into threats."
 

Cons

"One area for improvement is the inclusion of a load balancer in on-premises solutions."
"Imperva Data Security needs to improve first-level support."
"The development mode on the platform needs improvement."
"The deployment is not easy."
"The development mode on the platform needs improvement. For example, the archiving functionalities should be enhanced to allow easy conversion of archived logs into CSV or Excel formats for data analysis."
"I rate Microsoft support five out of 10. It gets better once you're escalated past the first and second levels. It's difficult to get the necessary support when tickets are first opened."
"Most of the time, when we log into the support, we don't get a chance to interact with Microsoft employees directly, except having it go to outsource employees of Microsoft. The initial interaction has not been that great because outsourced companies cannot provide the kind of quality or technical expertise that we look for. We have a technical manager from Microsoft, but they are kind of average unless we make noise and ask them to escalate. We then can get the right people and the right solution, but it definitely takes time."
"The initial setup is not actually so complex but it feels complex because there are many add-ons. There are many options and my team needs to be aware of all of these changes happening on the backend which is a distraction."
"I recommend that they extend the scope for legacy infra assets."
"It's hard to reach someone who understands my problems. I haven't had many issues, so I haven't called them."
"The range of workloads is broad, but we'd love to add more workloads and make it a single security solution that covers all those workloads. Covering more would allow us to see and protect more workloads from a single pane of glass. Additional features should include protection for more AI workloads as it currently focuses primarily on OpenAI."
"Most customer teams need more training on this type of product."
"One of the main challenges that we have been facing with Azure Security Center is the cost. The costs are really a complex calculation, e.g., to calculate the monthly costs. Azure is calculating on an hourly basis for use of the resource. Because of this, we found it really complex to promote what will be our costs for the next couple of months. I think if Azure could reduce the complex calculation and come up with straightforward cost mapping that would be very useful from a product point of view."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is reasonably good in South Africa."
"The pricing is very difficult because every type of Defender for Cloud has its own metrics and pricing. If you have Cloud for Key Vault, the pricing is different than it is for storage. Every type has its own pricing list and rules."
"The cost of the license is based on the subscriptions that you have."
"Its pricing is a little bit high in terms of Azure Security Center, but the good thing is that we don't need to maintain and deploy it. So, while the pricing is high, it is native to Azure which is why we prefer using this tool."
"The licensing is straightforward but can become expensive if you cover everything. You must balance the cost against the importance of what needs covering."
"Microsoft's licensing and pricing are sometimes complicated. If someone is new to Microsoft's licensing, they might have difficulty with it."
"This solution is more cost-effective than some competing products. My understanding is that it is based on the number of integrations that you have, so if you have fewer subscriptions then you pay less for the service."
"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."
"Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Insurance Company
11%
University
11%
Computer Software Company
13%
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 Imperva Data Security?
The price is high, but it is not as high as competitors like IBM, Guardian, and Oracle. It cannot be considered low-priced.
What needs improvement with Imperva Data Security?
The development mode on the platform needs improvement. For example, the archiving functionalities should be enhanced to allow easy conversion of archived logs into CSV or Excel formats for data an...
What is your primary use case for Imperva Data Security?
We onboard databases with Imperva Data Security. I can put its policies around the environment I want to monitor. I can see it actually works if I want to prevent certain activities.
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 across your ecosystem. It also has great remote workforce capabilities and supports a...
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
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 Imperva Data Security vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.