No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Trellix Cloud Workload Security 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 Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
123
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (4th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Container Security (3rd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (1st), AI Observability (3rd)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
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 (5th), Container Management (6th), Container Security (5th), 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)
Trellix Cloud Workload Secu...
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 4.9%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 14.0%, up from 13.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Cloud Workload Security is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud14.0%
SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security4.9%
Trellix Cloud Workload Security0.6%
Other80.5%
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Sreeraj Mohandas - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Engineer at HashXpert
Consolidated cloud security has reduced manual work and has automated vulnerability remediation
I elaborate on my rating of SentinelOne support by mentioning that there was some time where the troubleshooting took a longer time. In fact, there were many meetings going on. The availability of the document on the internet is on a lesser side because as an engineer, I would want to know about the troubleshooting aspects of this particular tool. When I am facing a customer, I do not prefer to bring the vendor to every call and try to resolve it, as it takes months and months. It would be better to have a training session with the engineer on site to explain and train properly. This is not the case with SentinelOne, so this is the only thing I have a complaint about. I do not have any other room for improvement to suggest within SentinelOne itself. However, I would really want the AI assistant for the threat hunting part to be more accessible. They have it, but they are making it licensed, so it is a bit on the higher end.
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.
Madan Mohan - PeerSpot reviewer
Director Operations at SOFTPRO PLUS
Easy policy designing and highly scalable solution
The customers really want protection against unauthorized applications running on their servers. They should avoid installing any unknown source and use Trellix Cloud Workload Security for the best solution in workload security. It includes DNS with ransomware protection. With this, they can have complete protection for their servers. Additionally, any solution working with the database should implement change control. So, if any changes are made on the database side, they should be resolved and verified to ensure they are not made by any unknown source. This is the best solution we suggest to customers who want granular control to protect their servers. It's easy to deploy with a single agent. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten because policy designing is very easy too. And the manageability is very easy. You can easily manage it through EPO and deploy policies within five to ten minutes. No issues with that.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I would rate SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security a ten out of ten."
"The visibility SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security provides into the Cloud environment is a valuable feature."
"Atlas security graph is pretty cool. It maps out relationships between components on AWS, like load balancers and servers. This helps visualize potential attack paths and even suggests attack paths a malicious actor might take."
"The offensive security feature is valuable because it publicly detects the offensive and vulnerable things present in our domain or applications. It checks any applications with public access. Some of the applications give public access to certain files or are present over a particular domain. It detects and lets us know with evidence. That is quite good. It is protecting our infrastructure quite well."
"I recommend SentinelOne due to its high-security capabilities, which are essential to safeguard data and systems from potential threats."
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"The user-friendly dashboard offers both convenience and security by providing quick access to solutions and keeping us informed of potential threats."
"For Singularity, the task capability is easy to use and it has a very intuitive dashboard, which streamlines the processes."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud has significantly enhanced our overall security posture by approximately 20 to 25 percent."
"This solution has the best security center, security manager dashboard that I have ever seen."
"It has improved our security posture a lot, and with the implementation of Azure Security Center, we have resolved many issues, including being able to do security monitoring of the complete infrastructure across both cloud and on-prem environments."
"The solution is quite good and addresses many security gaps."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is its ability to assess an environment and give us a clear idea of what security components are lacking and which are not."
"The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available."
"If you are a Microsoft organization and most of your organization uses Microsoft, Microsoft Defender for Cloud will be the best approach as it provides the easiest implementation to the most robust solution for a Microsoft suite."
"The most valuable feature is that it's intuitive."
"The discovery feature is the most valuable. After you integrate your cloud environment, maybe an Azure or AWS, or a private environment hosted on VMware, it automatically starts discovering the number of servers that are running on that cloud and the number of services that you have done. It is a beautiful feature because, from a security standpoint, it is difficult to identify which VM is compliant or not when you keep on provisioning a number of VMs in the cloud. It also checks for compliance. It checks whether a system is compliant and whether antivirus is installed on a VM. If an antivirus is installed, it checks whether the antivirus is updated to the latest signature package or not. All these things are beautifully done by McAfee Cloud Workload Security. For communicating with the McAfee server, you need to install an agent on the VM. McAfee Cloud Workload Security gives you a direct opportunity to install an agent on a Windows machine. If you have a Windows cloud, you can directly push that agent onto the VM through your McAfee portal. It provides you a single dashboard view of all servers present in the cloud. It shows the servers on which the antivirus is already installed as well as the servers for which the antivirus installation is still pending. This dashboard view is a much-needed thing. It also has a centralized management, which makes it easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the application control."
"All these things are beautifully done by McAfee Cloud Workload Security."
 

Cons

"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"The area of improvement is the cost, which is high compared to other traditional endpoint protections."
"The first downside of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security was the onboarding process, which was very challenging and took a lot of time."
"When we request any changes, they must be reflected in the next update."
"Their search feature could be better."
"I would prefer to see SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security develop into a single pane of glass for ASPM and CSPM."
"Bugs need to be disclosed quickly."
"The application module focuses on the different codes and libraries that can be run on the machines. It is very important for Singularity EDR to detect what type of codes and what type of libraries can run in the machine. If they can implement a white list or a black list of codes or libraries that can be used in the machine, it would be very helpful. They can focus more on the application module."
"Pricing could be improved. There are limited options based on pricing for the government."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters. It could be cheaper."
"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."
"Defender could improve how data is represented. It can be unstructured or slow to load."
"Consistency is the area where the most improvement is needed. For example, there are some areas where the UI is not uniform across the board."
"As a micro-segmentation product, it's not so great, especially if you have a lot of systems."
"However, some Copilot features aren't available in the GCP environment. This is something we hope will be addressed in the future."
"Its vulnerability assessment is not the best. We cannot identify the vulnerabilities that are related to the operating system by using McAfee Cloud Workload Security."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"Its vulnerability assessment is not the best. We cannot identify the vulnerabilities that are related to the operating system by using McAfee Cloud Workload Security. I wish McAfee would add a vulnerability assessment tool that will not only identify the vulnerability but will also be able to generate a report so that the required patching can be done for the servers. Currently, McAfee Cloud Workload Security only integrates with AWS and Azure. If it can also integrate with GCP, Alibaba, and other cloud services available in the market, it would be good because not all people are using Azure and AWS."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
"PingSafe is fairly priced."
"The pricing for PingSafe in India was more reasonable than other competitors."
"We have an enterprise license. It is affordable. I'm not sure, but I think we pay 150,000 rupees per month."
"For pricing, it currently seems to be in line with market rates."
"Their pricing appears to be based simply on the number of accounts we have, which is common for cloud-based products."
"It's not expensive. The product is in its initial growth stages and appears more competitive compared to others. It comes in different variants, and I believe the enterprise version costs around $55 per user per year. I would rate it a five, somewhere fairly moderate."
"It was reasonable pricing for me."
"Although I am outside of the discussion on budget and costing, I can say that the importance of security provided by this solution is of such importance that whatever the cost is, it is not a factor."
"I rate Microsoft Defender a three out of ten for affordability. The price could be a little lower."
"Azure Defender is definitely pricey, but their competitors cost about the same. For example, a Palo Alto solution is the same price per endpoint, but the ground strikes cost a bit more than Azure Defender. Still, it's pricey for a company like ours. Maybe well-established organizations can afford it, but it might be too costly for a startup."
"Defender's basic version is free, which is good. Many of our teams are evaluating the paid version against third-party products."
"We only use the free tier, so we haven't faced any pricing, setup costs, or licensing challenges."
"Azure Defender is a bit pricey. The price could be lower."
"We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."
"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."
"It is not an expensive product. I am in the Indian market, and it is one of the most reliable and cost-effective solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions are best for your needs.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Government
13%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business52
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise59
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise49
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?
My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is that the pric...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
Integration could be improved because not all solutions can be integrated with SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security...
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 costs, and licensing was that the license cost was the only consideration. Setup an...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
To improve Microsoft Defender for Cloud, I think pricing-wise, the license price is a little bit higher from an inges...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
McAfee Cloud Workload Security
 

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.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Trellix Cloud Workload Security and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.