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

Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs FortiCNAPP comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 22, 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

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
33rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (27th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (17th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (21st), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (16th), Compliance Management (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is 1.0%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of FortiCNAPP is 1.8%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
FortiCNAPP1.8%
Arctic Wolf Managed Risk1.0%
Other97.2%
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.
Mark Freeborough - PeerSpot reviewer
Client Manager at MLL Telecom Ltd
Network segmentation has strengthened access control and now streamlines automated threat response
The most valuable features in FortiCNAPP include robust network segmentation and restricting access to network assets. It also supports security measures by leveraging security fabrics for better enforcement and policy enforcement. FortiCNAPP integrates with SIEM solutions, and we offer different SIEM options that work with Fortinet and AlienVault, among others, providing multiple scenarios.FortiCNAPP's automated policy recommendations significantly help improve security measures as part of an overall service wrap. When deploying a Fortinet SD-WAN or network, these tools provide greater visibility to vulnerabilities and enhanced security on the network. It functions as a proactive tool, enabling me to identify threats quickly and automate responses.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I appreciate the professionalism of the tool and have faith in the results it delivers."
"The reporting is really good from what I've seen so far."
"I appreciate the professionalism of the tool and have faith in the results it delivers."
"We get access to quarterly reviews with their team."
"The most valuable feature of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is being informed about what vulnerabilities there are exposed currently."
"Arctic Wolf Managed Risk kind of fills in the gaps and makes us aware of vulnerabilities or misconfigurations that exist out there."
"This solution has made huge strides in improving the awareness of our end users."
"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."
"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."
"There are many valuable features that I use in my daily work. The first are alerts and the event dossier that it generates, based on the severity. That is very insightful and helps me to have a security cap in our infrastructure. The second thing I like is the agent-based vulnerability management, which is the most accurate information."
"FortiCNAPP definitely brings time-saving benefits, and security is the main concern for the company."
"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."
"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use."
"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use, as well as some levels of machine learning anomaly detection that they have that can detect pivotal anomalies faster."
"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."
"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."
 

Cons

"The best way to take this product to the next level would be to implement a patch management solution."
"The presentation of the data could be improved."
"The scalability could improve."
"There are some challenges with integrations in Arctic Wolf Managed Risk. Some integrations could be improved to enhance functionality."
"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."
"The major area for improvement is the lack of a patch management feature to resolve some of the vulnerabilities detected."
"The presentation of the data could be improved. I believe they have significant room for improvement, particularly in making better analysis of the vulnerability data and presenting those data more effectively."
"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."
"However, the solution could be more user-friendly and intuitive."
"Lacework has not reduced the number of alerts we get. We've actually had to add resources as a result of using it because the application requires a lot of people to understand it to get the value out of it properly."
"Visibility is lacking, and both compliance-related metrics and IAM security control could be improved."
"In general, I would not recommend Lacework right now. There are more mature solutions that would be a better fit."
"Policy implementation is quite complex, and the stability will take more time for the solutions."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonable compared to the competition."
"It depends on the company size quite a bit."
"Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonably priced and I rate it a four out of ten."
"The licensing fee was approximately $80,000 USD, per year."
"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."
"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."
"My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
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?
The pricing is a mediator compared to other products; it is not that much higher and not much lower than other products, making it a very affordable price.
What needs improvement with Lacework?
Policy implementation is quite complex, and the stability will take more time for the solutions. There is definitely room for improvement in policy implementation.
What is your primary use case for Lacework?
FortiCNAPP is mainly used from a security point of view. Some VPNs charge for their solutions, but Fortinet provides a free-of-cost VPN solution, making it more reliable and cost-effective for clie...
 

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: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.