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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Sysdig Monitor comparison

Sponsored
 

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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (5th), Cloud and Data Center Security (3rd), Container Security (3rd), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Compliance Management (1st)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
4th
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), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (5th)
Sysdig Monitor
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (9th), Cloud Monitoring Software (34th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 3.7%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 11.0%, down from 12.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sysdig Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. 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.
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.
Md. Olid Hasan Bhuiyan - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides a good view of the sequence and offers in-depth visibility into my infrastructure
I needed to identify the sequence and frequency of system calls for a specific system. Sysdig provided this information readily. However, analyzing frequency proved more challenging. As far as I know, Sysdig Monitor lacks functionality to directly obtain system call frequency for certain files. Therefore, I had to capture a screenshot of the relevant data from Sysdig Monitor and then manually extract the text. A built-in Sysdig feature to retrieve system call frequency for specific website actions would greatly enhance its usefulness. I had difficulty installing Sysdig Monitor on Windows.

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 feature of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is its advanced AI and machine learning capabilities, which allow it to identify and respond to threats in real time."
"We liked the search bar in SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"The solution saves 40% of my time."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"It is fairly simple. Anybody can use it."
"I like CSPM the most. It captures a lot of alerts within a short period of time. When an alert gets triggered on the cloud, it throws an alert within half an hour, which is very reasonable. It is a plus point for us."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"When we started out, our secure score was pretty low. We adopted some of the recommendations that Security Center set out and we were able to make good progress on improving it. It had been in the low thirties and is now in the upper eighties."
"With respect to improving our security posture, it helps us to understand where we are in terms of compliance. We can easily know when we are below the standard because of the scores it calculates."
"DSPM is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the regulatory compliance aspect, where we utilize predefined initiatives like NIST."
"Defender for Cloud is an improvement over Trend Micro, our previous solution. We like integrating our endpoints and visualizing everything in one place. It provides comprehensive coverage for endpoints, servers, and overall environmental security."
"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 entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative."
"The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security."
"Docker containers are completely supported, kind of like "first class citizens"."
"The ability to stop/pause and capture logs when something happens is the most valuable feature."
"Sysdig Monitor impressed me with its in-depth visibility into my infrastructure."
 

Cons

"A beneficial improvement for SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security would be integration with Jira, allowing for a more streamlined ticketing system."
"Their search feature could be better."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"The Kubernetes scanning on the Oracle Cloud needs to be improved. It's on the roadmap. AWS has this capability, but it's unavailable for Oracle Cloud."
"There's room for improvement in the graphic explorer."
"The areas with room for improvement include the cost, which is higher compared to other security platforms. The dashboard can also be laggy."
"Crafting customized policies can be tricky."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"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."
"Azure is a complex solution. You have so many moving parts."
"No possibility to write or edit any capability."
"They could always work to make the pricing a bit lower."
"Sometimes it's very difficult to determine when I need Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a special resource group or a special kind of product."
"We haven't experienced issues with Microsoft Defender for Cloud for our company size of about five hundred people. However, I've heard there might be issues with scalability for larger enterprises."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is not compatible with Linux machines."
"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."
"I had difficulty installing Sysdig Monitor on Windows."
"It is needs to automate the actions to take when an alert is triggered."
""Events" reporting (errors, crashes, etc.) is not clear at all in a Mesos environment (i.e., it's not clear what specific container is the one that went down). In a Docker Compose environment, it may be way better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not that expensive. There are some tools that are double the cost of PingSafe. It is good on the pricing side."
"The features included in PingSafe justify its price point."
"It is cheap."
"As a partner, we receive a discount on the licenses."
"It is a little expensive. I would rate it a four out of ten for pricing."
"I am not involved in the pricing, but it is cost-effective."
"The pricing tends to be high."
"We have an enterprise license. It is affordable. I'm not sure, but I think we pay 150,000 rupees per month."
"Currently, Microsoft offers only one plan at the enterprise level which is $15 per machine."
"We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."
"I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good."
"There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."
"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."
"It has global licensing. It comes with multiple licenses since there are around 50,000 people (in our organization) who look at it."
"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."
"I'm not privy to that information, but I know it's probably close to a million dollars a year."
"Sysdig Monitor is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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?
I don't handle the price part, but it isn't more expensive than Palo Alto Prisma Cloud. It's not cheap, but it is wor...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
There is scope for more application security posture management features. Additionally, the runtime protection needs ...
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 needs improvement with Sysdig Monitor?
I needed to identify the sequence and frequency of system calls for a specific system. Sysdig provided this informati...
What is your primary use case for Sysdig Monitor?
During my undergraduate studies, I investigated how the frequency or order of actions within a specific system trigge...
 

Also Known As

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

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.
SAP Concur, Goldman Sachs, Worldpay by FIS, Cisco, Experian, Home Office, Societe Generale, Sunrun. More here: https://sysdig.com/customers/
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Sysdig Monitor and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.