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

Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs FortiCNAPP comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 18, 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

Arctic Wolf Managed Risk
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
35th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (12th)
FortiCNAPP
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
41st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (30th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (18th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (26th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (16th), Compliance Management (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of FortiCNAPP is 1.7%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Arctic Wolf Managed Risk1.2%
FortiCNAPP1.7%
Other97.1%
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

CK
Director, Information Technology at a performing arts with 201-500 employees
Proactive alert management enhances network security and provides peace of mind
The reporting is really good from what I've seen so far. They are on top of the alerts, especially the critical ones. This proactive approach to alert management ensures that if someone downloads something on a workstation that shouldn't be downloaded, they address it quickly. Their ability to identify and provide information on critical alerts is very valuable.
SK
Software Engineer at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Improving security insights has been helpful but inconsistent vulnerability tracking needs attention
The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly. Regarding improvements, the vulnerability part, recent changes with user management, and Fortinet IM coming into place, which is not helpful at all because it cuts out the automation part, are the most important things. Lacework FortiCNAPP should have a new clean UI and ease of access for the users as that should be the main concern. There are limitations regarding the scalability of Lacework FortiCNAPP. There are also more limitations with integrations like GitHub or any other pipeline, CI/CD, or ISD. It is glitchy and works well only sometimes, and most of the time, the reports or other things are not properly calculated or circulated with the teams.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The user-friendly interface and customizable reporting have helped our IT team interpret and act on the platform's insights."
"We get access to quarterly reviews with their team."
"I appreciate the professionalism of the tool and have faith in the results it delivers."
"We have a patch management solution that scans for any patches that can be applied and then applies these patches, but it doesn't hit everything. It also doesn't find all misconfigurations and things like that. Arctic Wolf Managed Risk kind of fills in the gaps and makes us aware of vulnerabilities or misconfigurations that exist out there. It does an agent scan for software versions and compares them to what CVs are out there and lets us know."
"The most valuable feature of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is being informed about what vulnerabilities there are exposed currently."
"The customer support is incredible."
"This solution has made huge strides in improving the awareness of our end users."
"The reporting is really good from what I've seen so far."
"The most valuable aspects are identifying vulnerabilities—things that are out there that we aren't aware of—as well as finding what path of access attackers could use, and being able to see open SSL or S3 buckets and the like."
"The machine learning capability in Lacework FortiCNAPP is used for threat detection, and automated policy recommendation helps to improve my security measures in general."
"The compliance reports are definitely most valuable because they save time and are accurate. So, instead of relying on a human going through and checking or providing me with a report, I could just log into Lacework and see for myself."
"The most valuable feature is Lacework's ability to distill all the security and audit logs. I recommend it to my customers. Normally, when I consult for other customers that are getting into the cloud, we use native security tools. It's more of a rule-based engine."
"I find the cloud configuration compliance scanning mature. It generates a lot of data and supports major frameworks like ISO 27001 or SOC 2, providing reports and datasets. Another feature I appreciate is setting custom alerts for specific events. Additionally, I value the agent-based monitoring and scanning for compute nodes. It gives us deeper insights into our workloads and helps identify vulnerabilities across our deployed assets."
"Lacework is helping a lot in reducing the noise of the alerts. Usually, whenever you have a tool in place, you have a lot of noise in terms of alerts, but the time for an engineer to look into those alerts is limited. Lacework is helping us to consolidate the information that we are getting from the agents and other sources. We are able to focus only on the things that matter, which is the most valuable thing for us. It saves time, and for investigations, we have the right context to take action."
"The most valuable feature, from a compliance perspective, is the ability to use Lacework as a platform for multiple compliance standards. We have to meet multiple standards like PCI, SOC 2, CIS, and whatever else is out there. The ability to have reports generated, per security standard, is one of the best features for me."
"Polygraph compliance is a valuable feature. In our perspective, it delivers significant benefits. The clarity it offers, along with the ability to identify and address misconfigurations, is invaluable. When such issues arise, we promptly acknowledge and take action, effectively collaborating with our teams and the responsible parties for those assets. This enables us to promptly manage problems as soon as they arise."
 

Cons

"The best way to take this product to the next level would be to implement a patch management solution."
"Arctic Wolf Managed Risk needs to add more integrations."
"The major area for improvement is the lack of a patch management feature to resolve some of the vulnerabilities detected."
"It could be easier to use. They could present things in a little bit more ranked order rather than kind of giving you everything out there. It should highlight the really important stuff and make it easier to get to good rather than perfect."
"As far as the product is concerned, I would really like the scanning feature to let us know that a threat has been addressed once we apply the relevant patch. We are not seeing this currently when running a scan."
"The major area for improvement is the lack of a patch management feature to resolve some of the vulnerabilities detected."
"The scalability could improve."
"There are some challenges with integrations in Arctic Wolf Managed Risk. Some integrations could be improved to enhance functionality."
"The configuration and setup of alerts should be easier. They should make it easier to integrate with systems like Slack and Datadog. I didn't spend too much time on it, but to me, it wasn't as simple as the alerting that I've seen on other systems."
"Lacework lacks remediation features, but I believe they're working on that. They're focused on the reporting aspect, but other features need to improve. They're also adding some compliance features, so it's not worth saying they need to get better at it."
"There are a couple of the difficulties we encounter in the realm of cybersecurity, or security as a whole, that relate to potentially limited clarity. Having the capacity to perceive the configuration aspect and having the ability to contribute to it holds substantial advantages, in my view. It ranks high, primarily due to its role in guaranteeing compliance and the potential to uncover vulnerabilities, which could infiltrate the system and introduce potential risks. I had been exploring a specific feature that captured my interest. However, just yesterday, I participated in a product update session that announced the imminent arrival of this feature. The feature involves real-time alerting. This was something I had been anticipating, and it seems that this capability is now being integrated, possibly as part of threat intelligence. While anomaly events consistently and promptly appear in the console, certain alerts tend to experience delays before being displayed. Yet, with the recent product update, this issue is expected to be resolved. Currently, a comprehensive view of all policies is available within the console. However, I want a more tailored display of my compliance posture, focusing specifically on policies relevant to me. For instance, if I'm not subject to HIPAA regulations, I'd prefer not to see the HIPAA compliance details. It's worth noting that even with this request, there exists a filtering mechanism to control the type of compliance information visible. This flexibility provides a workaround to my preference, which is why it's challenging for me to definitively state my exact request."
"A feature that I have requested from them is the ability to sort alerts and policies based on a security framework. Right now, when you go into alerts, you have hundreds and hundreds of them that you have to manually pick. It would be useful to have categories for CIS Benchmark or SOC 2 and be able to display all the alerts and policies for one security framework."
"I would like to see a remote access assistance feature. And the threat-hunting platform could be better."
"The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly."
"The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses its own LQL query language, and each database across different layers and modules is structured differently, complicating correlation efforts. Consequently, I had to create extensive custom reports outside Lacework because their default dashboards didn't communicate risk metrics. They're addressing these issues by redesigning their tools, including introducing the dashboard, which is a step closer to actionable insights but still needs refinement."
"Visibility is lacking, and both compliance-related metrics and IAM security control could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It depends on the company size quite a bit."
"The price of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonable compared to the competition."
"Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonably priced and I rate it a four out of ten."
"The pricing has gotten better. That scenario was somewhat unstable. They have a rather interesting licensing structure. I believe you get 200 resources per "Lacework unit." It was difficult, in the beginning, to figure out exactly what a "resource" was... That was a problem until about a year or so ago. They have improved it and it has stabilized quite a bit."
"It is slightly expensive. It depends on how big your environment is, but it is expensive. Right now, we are spending a lot of money. We have covered all of the cloud providers and most of our colocation facilities as well, so we cannot complain, but it is slightly expensive. It is not super expensive."
"My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz."
"The licensing fee was approximately $80,000 USD, per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Arctic Wolf Managed Risk?
There are some challenges with integrations in Arctic Wolf Managed Risk. Some integrations could be improved to enhance functionality.
What advice do you have for others considering Arctic Wolf Managed Risk?
We will proceed with publishing the review on the platform, making it available to other users. The link will be provided, and you can add to it, edit it, or adjust your notification preferences as...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lacework?
My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz.
What needs improvement with Lacework?
The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly. Regarding improvements, the vulnerability part, recent changes with user managem...
What is your primary use case for Lacework?
The major use case for Lacework FortiCNAPP is for security. I'm using it for security internally for my company.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Polygraph, FortiCNP, Lacework
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Zelle LLP, DNI Corp, Roper Pump, Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice
J.Crew, AdRoll, Snowflake, VMWare, Iterable, Pure Storage, TrueCar, NerdWallet, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. FortiCNAPP and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.