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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Trivy comparison

 

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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Container Security
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
87
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (8th), Container Management (7th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (1st), 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) (2nd)
Trivy
Ranking in Container Security
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 6.2%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trivy is 4.9%, up from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Trivy4.9%
Microsoft Defender for Cloud6.2%
Other88.9%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

David Birhange - PeerSpot reviewer
Director, Cloud and Modern Workplace at Informanix Technology Group
Brings together cloud security insights through a unified view and supports agentless protection for virtual machines
Copilot and similar features are already being used, though not necessarily for Microsoft Defender for Cloud specifically. We are trying to get more experience before rolling out most of Microsoft Defender for Cloud's AI capabilities. This is definitely on our to-do list, and the priority is urgent as we seek to learn more about these capabilities. The GenAI threat protection from Microsoft Defender for Cloud has not been enabled yet. There are many unknowns with AI applications. AI agents will operate while you're not present, whether you are sleeping or awake, and it's unclear whether there would be any exfiltration of data or how data is being managed. Microsoft Purview is being used extensively, and there is significant development going on with DSPM that will be rolled out to address security concerns. Data labeling and proper demarcation for sensitivity of data before it is received are being actively pursued.
Utsav Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Security Consultant at Ernst & Young
Maintain operational efficiency by detecting misconfigurations and vulnerabilities
The vulnerability scanning feature is excellent as it supports various container capabilities like Docker and Sharma. It also offers repository scanning in the source code domain, allowing pre-push code scans. The misconfiguration detection works well for CloudFormation, Docker files, and Terraform. Its compliance support, like NIST, ensures that configurations align with standards. Trivy helps me significantly detect misconfigurations missed by the ops engineers or in Terraform by the naked eye. It ensures that my deployments are free of misconfigurations and vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud that I appreciate most is the ability to view logs of applications, as I find it much clearer to understand what is running."
"Defender for Cloud is a plug-and-play solution that provides continuous posture management once enabled."
"I would like to see more connectors and plugins with other platforms."
"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."
"It has seamless integration with any of the services I mentioned, on Azure, such as IaaS platforms, virtual machines, applications, or databases, because it's an in-house product from Microsoft within the Azure ecosystem."
"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."
"The security policy is the most valuable feature for us. We can go into the environment settings and attach any globally recognized framework like ISO or any benchmark."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud monitors our entire cloud environment. It enables conditional access and incorporates features like number matching and single sign-on for all our cloud apps. It is great for protecting against ransomware and various security threats."
"The most valuable feature of Trivy is its easy integration with the CI/CD pipeline."
"Trivy's open source nature and wide functionality are incredibly valuable."
"What I find valuable is the ease of setup with Trivy, including pre-defined operators that require minimal configuration."
"It's customizable, allowing me to add any rules and format HTML templates as I wish."
"Trivy is easy to integrate with CI/CD and can be installed on desktops to scan images."
"Trivy's open source nature and wide functionality are incredibly valuable."
"It is open-source."
"One of the great features of Trivy is that it helps me scan items such as AWS credentials and GCP service accounts."
 

Cons

"There needs to be improvement in the security recommendations, particularly in attack path mapping. Sometimes, it misleads users about the real exposure of external-facing assets."
"The pricing could be better."
"Microsoft sources most of their threat intelligence internally, but I think they should open themselves up to bodies that provide feel intelligence to build a better engine. There may be threats out there that they don't report because their team is not doing anything on that and they don't have arrangements with another party that is involved in that research."
"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 product was a bit complex to set up earlier, however, it is a bit streamlined now."
"My experience with Microsoft Defender for Cloud has been largely negative due to a poor user experience."
"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."
"If a customer is already using Okta as an SSO in its entire environment, they will want to continue with it. But Security Center doesn't understand that and keeps making recommendations. It would help if it let us resolve a recommendation, even if it is not implemented."
"Trivy can improve by providing an output in PDF format."
"Trivy generates many false positives, flagging non-existent vulnerabilities. Improvements could include better contextual analysis or granular filtering."
"In our CI/CD pipelines, Trivy lacks built-in functionality for report analysis."
"Trivy generates many false positives, flagging non-existent vulnerabilities."
"For malware detection, I need to use two tools: Trivy as my anomaly scanner and ClamAV. I am integrating these two tools into the CI pipeline. If both malware and anomaly detection could be managed by one tool, I would not need to depend on two tools."
"One drawback I have observed with Trivy is the difficulty in building or integrating a UI, particularly for an operator in the NetSuite example."
"In our CI/CD pipelines, Trivy lacks built-in functionality for report analysis."
"The main area for improvement is in differentiating between OS and application-based vulnerabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I am not involved in this area. However, I believe its price is okay because even small customers are using Azure Security Center. I don't think it is very expensive."
"It has global licensing. It comes with multiple licenses since there are around 50,000 people (in our organization) who look at it."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The tool is pretty expensive."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise49
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

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 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 did have a consultation with a third party to go over different tiers and produ...
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 Zero Trust, similar to ThreatLocker software.
What needs improvement with Trivy?
Trivy's marketing and awareness need improvement. Not everyone knows about it, which isn't ideal given its capabilities. There's potential to integrate AI and machine learning for enhanced function...
What is your primary use case for Trivy?
I use Trivy ( /products/trivy-reviews ) to scan code for vulnerabilities before deployment. Our projects, which are developed by different developers, involve various dependencies and third-party c...
What advice do you have for others considering Trivy?
I recommend Trivy to others due to its powerful and useful features. However, I suggest increasing its marketing to raise awareness. I rate Trivy an eight out of ten.
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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. Trivy and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.