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

"We like SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"The SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security has substantially affected my risk posture, as it was the first tool that notified me of the public exposure of a repository by a developer, allowing me to resolve the issue within minutes."
"I would rate their support a ten out of ten."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's unified platform experience has helped streamline our security operations, as it has definitely allowed us to get more accurate information faster."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"Cloud Native Security offers a valuable tool called an offensive search engine."
"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."
"Provides a very good view of the entire security setup of your organization."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud has definitely helped us manage and secure our multi-cloud environment by providing ease of use."
"Some of the most valuable features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud include its effectiveness in threat detection through unsupervised machine learning, CTI, and advanced sandboxing."
"I have not experienced any difficulties or issues with the stability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture."
"The solution's robust security posture is the most valuable feature."
"Most importantly, it's an integrated solution."
"Good compliance policies."
"All these things are beautifully done by McAfee Cloud Workload Security."
"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."
 

Cons

"There is scope for more application security posture management features. Additionally, the runtime protection needs attention."
"While SentinelOne offers robust security features, its higher cost may present a challenge for budget-conscious organizations."
"The SentinelOne customer support needs improvement, as they are sometimes late in responding, which is critical in a production issue."
"There is scope for more application security posture management features. Additionally, the runtime protection needs attention."
"It sometimes produces a high number of false positive alerts."
"The Automation tab is an add-on that doesn’t work properly. They provide a list of scripts that don’t work and I have asked support to assist but they won’t help. When running on various endpoints the script doesn’t work and if it does, it’s only a couple. There are a lot of useful scripts that would be beneficial to run forensics, event logs, and process lists running on the endpoint."
"I request that SentinelOne investigate this false positive, as SentinelOne has a higher false positive rate than other XDR solutions."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security has limited legacy system support and may not fully support older operating systems or legacy environments."
"I would like to see better automation when it comes to pushing out security features to the recommendations, and better documentation on the step-by-step procedures for enabling certain features."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud could be improved by adding capabilities for NetApp files and more PaaS resources from other vendors, not just Microsoft."
"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."
"The remediation process could be improved."
"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 solution could improve by being more intuitive and easier to use requiring less technical knowledge."
"Customizing some of the compliance requirements based on individual needs seems like the biggest area of improvement. There should be an option to turn specific controls on and off based on how your solution is configured."
"Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something."
"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."
"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

"The tool is cost-effective."
"It is not that expensive. There are some tools that are double the cost of PingSafe. It is good on the pricing side."
"PingSafe is affordable."
"The cost for PingSafe is average when compared to other CSPM tools."
"Singularity Cloud Workload Security's licensing and price were cheaper than the other solutions we looked at."
"The pricing is somewhat high compared to other market tools."
"PingSafe is not very expensive compared to Prisma Cloud, but it's also not that cheap. However, because of its features, it makes sense to us as a company. It's fairly priced."
"PingSafe is less expensive than other options."
"The price of the solution is good for the features we receive and there is an additional cost for Microsoft premier support. However, some of my potential customers have found it to be expensive and have gone on to choose another solution."
"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."
"We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."
"Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."
"Defender for Cloud is pretty costly for a single line. It's incredibly high to pay monthly for security per server. The cost is considerable for an enterprise with 500-plus virtual machines, and the monthly bill can spike."
"The licensing is straightforward but can become expensive if you cover everything. You must balance the cost against the importance of what needs covering."
"It is bundled with our enterprise subscription, which makes it easy to go for it. It is available by default, and there is no extra cost for using the standard features."
"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."
"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.
894,830 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 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...
What is your primary use case for PingSafe?
I use SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security to collect endpoint data from the company, such as servers, computers, a...
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.
894,830 professionals have used our research since 2012.