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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs SUSE NeuVector comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

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
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (4th), Cloud and Data Center Security (3rd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (2nd), AI Observability (2nd)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Container Security
7th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (8th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (4th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (3rd)
SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
16th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
20th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 4.2%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 6.1%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 1.9%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security4.2%
Microsoft Defender for Cloud6.1%
SUSE NeuVector1.9%
Other87.8%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

SC
Information Security Engineer at DataVigilant Infotech
Enables us to prioritize and effectively address critical security issues
Evidence-based reporting helps us to prioritize and solve critical security issues. The new visualization feature demonstrates how an attacker can enter the system, highlighting the potential path that can be exploited and outlining all the steps the attacker could take. With that visibility, we can ensure the perimeter is strong and attackers cannot enter, thus reducing the risk. It has helped us prioritize issues. The visibility into how an attack could happen is valuable. For example, it highlights the system vulnerability and outlines where an attack could propagate. The visualization helps me to prioritize remediation, and if I don't know where to start, I can check to see the score that enables me to prioritize issues. I am using infrastructure-as-code scanning, and it's one of the useful features. In pre-production, it identifies embedded secrets and misconfigurations, including issues with Kubernetes or some privileged containers. This feature allows us to pass the audit and secure IaC code so that it isn't easily exploitable by attackers. We can more proactively work to identify and resolve vulnerabilities by using the dashboard and the alerting system that SentinelOne provides. It helps us with audits and compliance. We can show the compliance in percentage. We can confidently say that our company or infrastructure is very secure. It has improved our security posture by 30% to 35%. It has reduced our false positives by 30%. It has helped teams collaborate better. The security team manages SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security, and when it flags vulnerabilities, they are forwarded to DevOps for remediation. Previously, we needed to identify and report the issues, but there would be lapses in communication. Now, there is a centralized dashboard that anyone can look at and see the open issues and work on them.
RW
Head Of IT at Cirrus Response
Cloud security has cut investigation time and now reveals threats faster but needs simpler oversight
When deploying AI applications, my key security concerns with Microsoft Defender for Cloud are data loss, leakage of data, and guardrails around the actual AI, and I am hoping that this is going to help me put those guardrails in place and identify data exfiltration. Microsoft Defender for Cloud has not helped me manage and secure multi-cloud environments, as we are 100 percent Microsoft and have not really got it in any other environment at all. I am not yet using the unified AI-powered security feature offered by Microsoft Defender for Cloud, but that is coming. I am not yet using the integrated XDR feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud, but that is coming. I am not yet utilizing the GenAI threat protection features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud. That is also coming and a lot of that will come from learning it here. I have enabled the agentless scanning in my cloud environment with Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Assessing the impact on my workload protection without needing to install agents with Microsoft Defender for Cloud makes it a lot easier, but it also identifies a lot more, which puts more load on me sometimes. I would advise another organization considering Microsoft Defender for Cloud that it is the most logical route to follow if their whole ecosystem is Microsoft. It is easy to implement and it is very self-explanatory when doing it, making sense to just follow the steps as it is too simple, really. I would rate this review a 7.5 out of 10.
Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at ProQuanta
Good value for money; great for policy management
Our model of deployment for this solution is on-premises. For people looking into this solution and trying to use it for the first time, I'd say make your life easier by using the SUSE product as well on top of your community scale stack. That makes your integration points a lot easier and smoother. I would also say during your initial setup, make sure that your clusters are already in terms of the capabilities with the version required. I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this rating is that what they offer is solid, but they could expand their service and add more features just to make more things integrated into an enterprise itself.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security stands out for its user-friendly interface and intuitive software, making it easy to navigate and use."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers several valuable features, most notably the rapid vulnerability notifications that provide timely alerts regarding our infrastructure."
"All the features we use are equal and get the job done."
"SentinelOne's behaviour analytics are valuable because they detect anomalies and malicious behaviour that signature-based solutions might miss."
"The solution helped free other staff to work on other projects or other tasks. We basically just had to do a bunch of upfront configuring. With it, we do not have to spend as much time in the console."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers valuable scalability suitable for organizations of all sizes, from small businesses to large enterprises."
"The features that stand out are threat detection using advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning, helping to identify and respond to threats in real-time."
"The solution is quite good and addresses many security gaps."
"The product has given us more insight into potential avenues for attack paths."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"Defender is user-friendly and provides decent visibility into threats."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a valuable tool that integrates seamlessly with Azure Policy and our Security SIEM, simplifying implementation and enhancing security posture."
"We saw improvement from a regulatory compliance perspective due to having a single dashboard."
"The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available."
"My favorite part of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is the compliance features. Defender covers a wide range of workloads, on par with competing products on the market."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
 

Cons

"We don't get any notifications from SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security when the clusters are down."
"We are experiencing problems with Cloud Native Security reporting."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security."
"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."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's current documentation could be improved to better assist customers during the cluster onboarding process."
"The price is on the higher side. The dashboard can be more detailed."
"There's an array of upcoming versions with numerous features to be incorporated into the roadmap. Customers particularly appreciate the service's emphasis on intensive security, especially the secret scanning aspect. During the proof of concept (POC) phase, the system is required to gather logs from the customer's environment. This process entails obtaining specific permissions, especially in terms of gateway access. While most permissions for POC are manageable, the need for various permissions may need improvement, especially in the context of security."
"The alerting system of the product is an area that I look at and sometimes get confused about. I feel the alerting feature needs improvement."
"The pricing could be improved, as it is somewhat high for smaller companies."
"However, some Copilot features aren't available in the GCP environment. This is something we hope will be addressed in the future."
"For Kubernetes, I was using Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS). To see that whatever is getting deployed into AKS goes through the correct checks and balances in terms of affinities and other similar aspects and follows all the policies, we had to use a product called Stackrox. At a granular level, the built-in policies were good for Kubernetes, but to protect our containers from a coding point of view, we had to use a few other products. For example, from a programming point of view, we were using Checkmarx for static code analysis. For CIS compliance, there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, we had to use other plugins to see that the CIS benchmarks are compliant. There are CIS benchmarks for Kubernetes on AWS and GCP, but there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, Azure Security Center fell short from the regulatory compliance point of view, and we had to use one more product. We ended up with two different dashboards. We had Azure Security Center, and we had Stackrox that had its own dashboard. The operations team and the security team had to look at two dashboards, and they couldn't get an integrated piece. That's a drawback of Azure Security Center. Azure Security Center should provide APIs so that we can integrate its dashboard within other enterprise dashboards, such as the PowerBI dashboard. We couldn't get through these aspects, and we ended up giving Reader security permission to too many people, which was okay to some extent, but when we had to administer the users for the Stackrox portal and Azure Security Center, it became painful."
"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."
"An area where Microsoft Defender for Cloud could be improved is in getting away from having multiple menus that do the same thing, which seems imposing when looking at it."
"If they had an easier way to display all the vulnerabilities of the machines affected and remediation steps on one screen rather than having to dive deep into each of them, that would be a lot easier."
"Customer service and support from Microsoft are very poor. Even for high-severity cases, response or resolution time can extend to three or four weeks."
"I would like to have the ability to customize executive reporting."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"Using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features between two clusters and could be improved."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"However, I found that the support in Egypt was not very qualified, and there was a need to upgrade to a higher support layer to solve my issues."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing for PingSafe in India was more reasonable than other competitors."
"SentinelOne is relatively cheap. If ten is the most expensive, I would rate it a seven."
"The cost for PingSafe is average when compared to other CSPM tools."
"It's not cheap, but it is worth the price."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"Its pricing is okay. It is in line with what other providers were providing. It is not cheap. It is not expensive."
"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
"The solution is expensive, and I rate it a five to six out of ten."
"While we pay for any additional features, the pricing seems competitive, though I am not involved in the specific cost details."
"Azure Defender is a bit pricey. The price could be lower."
"They have a free version, but the license for this one isn't too high. It's free to start with, and you're charged for using it beyond 30 days. Some other pieces of Defender are charged based on usage, so you will be charged more for a high volume of transactions. I believe Defender for Cloud is a daily charge based on Azure's App Service Pricing."
"I rate Microsoft Defender a three out of ten for affordability. The price could be a little lower."
"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."
"Pricing depends on your workload size, but it is very cheap. If you're talking about virtual machines, it is $5 or something for each machine, which is minimal. If you go for some agent-based solution for every virtual machine, then you need to pay the same thing or more than that. For an on-premises solution like this, we were paying around $30 to $50 based on size. With Defender, Microsoft doesn't bother about the size. You pay based on the number of machines. So, if you have 10 virtual machines, and 10 virtual machines are being monitored, you are paying based on that rather than the size of the virtual machine. Thus, you are paying for the number of units rather than paying for the size of your units."
"The licensing is straightforward but can become expensive if you cover everything. You must balance the cost against the importance of what needs covering."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business49
Midsize Enterprise22
Large Enterprise55
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise49
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
 

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?
Regarding the pricing for SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security, I do not think it is something I can compare.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
I do not see room for improvement in SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security. In the future, I would like to see the i...
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Microsoft Defender for Cloud was pretty straightforward. We...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
Microsoft Defender for Cloud can be improved. An additional feature that should be included in the next release is Ze...
What needs improvement with NeuVector?
One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node por...
What is your primary use case for NeuVector?
In my company, I am looking to deploy a container security runtime solution.
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
NeuVector
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
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.
Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. SUSE NeuVector and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.