Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

Arctic Wolf Networks and Microsoft are both solutions in the Vulnerability Management category. Arctic Wolf Networks is ranked #31 with an average rating of 8.8, while Microsoft is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.1. Arctic Wolf Networks holds a 1.1% mindshare in VM, compared to Microsoft’s 5.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Arctic Wolf Networks users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 2025

Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Arctic Wolf Managed Risk offer distinguished cloud security solutions. Microsoft Defender for Cloud appears to lead in integration with Microsoft services, while Arctic Wolf excels in providing detailed threat analysis and risk management.

Features: Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides advanced threat protection, seamless Microsoft environment integration, and real-time monitoring. Arctic Wolf Managed Risk focuses on threat detection, risk management, and offers a comprehensive reporting suite.

Room for Improvement: Microsoft Defender for Cloud could enhance support for non-Microsoft platforms, streamline subscription management, and improve multi-cloud visibility. Arctic Wolf Managed Risk may benefit from providing automated solutions, reducing initial setup costs, and offering more intuitive navigation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Defender for Cloud is easily deployed within Microsoft environments, backed by integrated support. Arctic Wolf Managed Risk offers personalized deployment assistance and proactive customer service, which is appealing outside Microsoft-centric setups.

Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Defender for Cloud offers cost-effective options with high ROI for existing Microsoft users, maximizing existing licenses. Arctic Wolf Managed Risk, though possibly requiring higher initial costs, delivers significant ROI through robust risk management capabilities, emphasizing long-term value.

To learn more, read our detailed Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,295 peers since 2012

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

Zafran Security

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.9%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is 1.1%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 5.5%, up from 5.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Vulnerability Management

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini

Associate Director IT Security Operations at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees

Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions

I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.

Read full review

Jared Kruger

Buisness Developer Manager / Sales Executive at Troye

Helps to conduct vulnerability scans but needs to add more integrations

There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you to scan and patch the vulnerabilities. Any 50-member or small company that has an IT footprint carries risk from a cybersecurity perspective. These companies use tools but don't have the talent to leverage them.

Read full review

Vibhor Goel

Senior Cloud Platform Engineer at Deutsche Börse

A single tool for complete visibility and addressing security gaps

Currently, issues are structured in Microsoft Defender for Cloud at severity levels of high, critical, or warning, but these severity levels are not always right. For example, Microsoft might consider a port being open as critical, but that might not be the case for our company. Similarly, it might suggest closing some management ports, but you might need them to be able to log in, so the severity levels for certain things can be improved. Even though Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a way to temporarily disable certain alerts or notifications without affecting our security score, it would be better to have more granularized control over these recommendations. Currently, we cannot even disable certain alerts or notifications. 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. Additionally, enabling Defender for Cloud at the resource group level, rather than only at the subscription level, would be beneficial.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."

"We saw benefits from Zafran Security almost immediately after deploying it."

"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."

"Zafran is an excellent tool."

"Overall, we have seen about eighty-seven percent reduction of the number of vulnerabilities that require urgency to remediate, specifically the number of criticals."

"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."

"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 customer support is incredible."

"There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you to scan and patch the vulnerabilities. Any 50-member or small company that has an IT footprint carries risk from a cybersecurity perspective. These companies use tools but don't have the talent to leverage them."

"The most valuable feature of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is being informed about what vulnerabilities there are exposed currently."

"The user-friendly interface and customizable reporting have helped our IT team interpret and act on the platform's insights."

"This solution has made huge strides in improving the awareness of our end users."

More Arctic Wolf Managed Risk pros

"The dashboard is very good. It gives our clients a lot of information and allows them to have a complete overview of the system. Everything is visible in one glance."

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is stable and reliable as advertised."

"The most valuable feature is the hunting feature, which integrates well into the entire Microsoft ecosystem."

"This is a platform as a service provided by Azure. We don't need to install or maintain Azure Security Center. It is a ready-made service available in Azure. This is one of the main things that we like. If you look at similar tools, we have to install, maintain, and update services. Whereas, Azure Security Center manages what we are using. This is a good feature that has helped us a lot."

"Scalability is great, and I would rate it a ten out of ten."

"The most valuable feature is the regulatory compliance aspect, where we utilize predefined initiatives like NIST. Alert management is another useful feature. Alerts are directly integrated with our email or DevOps board for easy viewing, allowing us to identify problem areas efficiently."

"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."

"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."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud pros

Cons

"I think the ability to have some enhanced reporting capabilities is something they can improve on, as they have good reports but we have asked for some specific reporting enhancements."

"The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvements."

"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."

"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."

"The best way to take this product to the next level would be to implement a patch management solution."

"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."

"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."

"Arctic Wolf Managed Risk needs to add more integrations."

"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."

More Arctic Wolf Managed Risk cons

"I would like to have the ability to customize executive reporting."

"The solution could extend its capabilities to other cloud providers. Right now, if you want to monitor a virtual machine on another cloud, you can do that. However, this cannot be done with other cloud platform services. I hope once that is available then Defender for Cloud will be a unified solution for all cloud platform services."

"The initial setup is not actually so complex but it feels complex because there are many add-ons. There are many options and my team needs to be aware of all of these changes happening on the backend which is a distraction."

"Defender is occasionally unreliable. It isn't 100% efficient in terms of antivirus detection, but it isn't an issue most of the time. It's also somewhat difficult to train new security analysts to use Defender."

"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."

"The solution's portal is very easy to use, but there's one key component that is missing when it comes to managing policies. For example, if I've onboarded my server and I need to specify antivirus policies, there's no option to do that on the portal. I will have to go to Intune to deploy them. That is one main aspect that is missing and it's worrisome."

"While we are satisfied with Defender for Cloud's features, an AI enhancement could potentially provide better advice and adapt more effectively to our environment."

"Another thing is that Defender for Cloud uses more resources than CrowdStrike, which my current company uses. Defender for Cloud has two or three processes running simultaneously that consume memory and processor time. I had the chance to compare that with CrowdStrike a few days ago, which was significantly less. It would be nice if Defender were a little lighter. It's a relatively large installation that consumes more resources than competitors do."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"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 price of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonable compared to the competition."

"It has global licensing. It comes with multiple licenses since there are around 50,000 people (in our organization) who look at it."

"The pricing and licensing of Microsoft Defender for Cloud have been good for us. We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license."

"Pricing is difficult because each license has its own metrics and cost."

"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."

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters."

"This is a worldwide service and depending on the country, there will be different prices."

"The tool is pretty expensive."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

Computer Software Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Performing Arts

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?

Since we stood Zafran Security up in our private cloud, we handle the maintenance on our side. As we opted not to use...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Zafran Security?

In terms of areas for improvement, Zafran Security is doing a really great job as a new and emerging company. Oftenti...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?

My use cases for Zafran Security revolve around two primary areas. One is around vulnerability management and priorit...

See all answers

What do you like most about Arctic Wolf Managed Risk?

There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you t...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Arctic Wolf Managed Risk?

The pricing is fair, and I find it reasonable.

See all answers

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 enhan...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?

The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Cloud?

The pricing is pretty standard.

See all answers

Comparisons

Wiz Code vs Zafran Security

Compared 37% of the time

Vulcan Cyber vs Zafran Security

Compared 15% of the time

Tenable Vulnerability Management vs Zafran Security

Compared 9% of the time

ServiceNow Security Operations vs Zafran Security

Compared 8% of the time

Qualys VMDR vs Zafran Security

Compared 7% of the time

More Zafran Security Competitors

Rapid7 InsightVM vs Arctic Wolf Managed Risk

Compared 14% of the time

Adlumin Cybersecurity vs Arctic Wolf Managed Risk

Compared 13% of the time

Qualys VMDR vs Arctic Wolf Managed Risk

Compared 13% of the time

Wiz vs Arctic Wolf Managed Risk

Compared 9% of the time

Tenable Nessus vs Arctic Wolf Managed Risk

Compared 9% of the time

More Arctic Wolf Managed Risk Competitors

AWS GuardDuty vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 25% of the time

Wiz vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 12% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 8% of the time

Microsoft Defender XDR vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 4% of the time

Orca Security vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 3% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Zafran Security

July 2025

Download Zafran Security product report

Buyer's Guide

Vulnerability Management

August 2025

Download Arctic Wolf Managed Risk product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud

August 2025

Download Microsoft Defender for Cloud product report

Also Known As

No data available

Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Zafran Security

Demo not available

Arctic Wolf Networks

Microsoft

Overview

Zafran Security integrates with existing security tools to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities effectively, proving that most critical vulnerabilities are not exploitable, optimizing threat management.

Zafran Security introduces an innovative operating model for managing security threats and vulnerabilities. By leveraging the threat exposure management platform, it pinpoints and prioritizes exploitable vulnerabilities, reducing risk through immediate remediation. This platform enhances your hybrid cloud security by normalizing vulnerability signals and integrating specific IT context data, such as CVE runtime presence and internet asset reachability, into its analysis. No longer reliant on patch windows, Zafran Security allows you to manage risks actively.

What are the key features of Zafran Security?

Threat Exposure Management: Utilizes existing tools to prioritize vulnerabilities and manage threats.
Integrative Analysis: Combines security data with IT context for precise vulnerability management.
Real-time Risk Reduction: Enables immediate risk management without waiting for patches.
Hybrid Cloud Compatibility: Functions across diverse cloud environments for comprehensive security.

What benefits can users expect from Zafran Security?

Improved Security: Enhances protection by efficiently identifying and mitigating risks.
Cost Efficiency: Reduces unnecessary patching expenses by confirming non-exploitable vulnerabilities.
Time Savings: Frees developers to focus on root causes by handling immediate threats.
Comprehensive Insight: Offers a holistic view of security threats and vulnerabilities.

In industries where security is paramount, such as finance and healthcare, Zafran Security provides invaluable protection by ensuring that only exploitable vulnerabilities are addressed. It allows entities to maintain robust security measures while allocating resources efficiently, fitting seamlessly into existing security strategies.

Zafran Security

Delivered by security experts - Concierge Security® Team; the Arctic Wolf® Managed Risk solution enables you to define and contextualize your attack surface coverage across your networks, endpoints, and cloud environments; provides you with the risk priorities in your environment; and advises you on your remediation actions to ensure that you are benchmarking against configuration best practices and continually hardening your security posture.

Arctic Wolf Networks

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a comprehensive security solution that provides advanced threat protection for cloud workloads. It offers real-time visibility into the security posture of cloud environments, enabling organizations to quickly identify and respond to potential threats. With its advanced machine learning capabilities, Microsoft Defender for Cloud can detect and block sophisticated attacks, including zero-day exploits and fileless malware.

The solution also provides automated remediation capabilities, allowing security teams to quickly and easily respond to security incidents. With Microsoft Defender for Cloud, organizations can ensure the security and compliance of their cloud workloads, while reducing the burden on their security teams.

Microsoft

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Zelle LLP, DNI Corp, Roper Pump, Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.

Buyer's Guide

Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud

July 2025

Free Report: Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Find out what your peers are saying about Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud report.

See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.

We monitor all Vulnerability Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.