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

AWS Security Hub vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 27, 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

AWS Security Hub
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
13th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (5th)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (9th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (1st), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Microsoft Security Suite (8th), Compliance Management (5th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) category, the mindshare of AWS Security Hub is 4.2%, down from 5.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 9.3%, down from 11.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud9.3%
AWS Security Hub4.2%
Other86.5%
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
 

Featured Reviews

MuhammadAzhar Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers best practice recommendations and supports various compliance standards
Security Hub provides insightful information about what is running and where there might be weaknesses. It offers best practice recommendations and supports various compliance standards such as ISO and PCI DSS. Enabling these compliance checks helps identify non-compliant services and suggests steps to achieve compliance. The main advantage is providing information and compliance insights rather than prevention.
Vibhor Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Security Hub provides insightful information about what is running and where there might be weaknesses."
"The advantage is that it is cloud-native, and we do not need to install agents or sensors to find findings."
"One of the most effective features of AWS Security Hub is the easy access to a dashboard with a ready-to-use security score."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easy to manage...It is a scalable solution."
"The solution shows us our compliance score."
"It's a security posture management tool from AWS. Basically, it identifies misconfigurations, similar to Trusted Advisor but on a larger scale."
"Easily integrates with third-party tools"
"AWS Security Hub has very good integration features. It allows for AWS native services integration, and it helps us to integrate some of the services outside of AWS. They have partners, such as Amazon Preferred Network Partners (APN). If you have different security tools around APN, we can integrate those findings with AWS Security Hub reducing the need to refer to different portals or different UIs. You can have AWS Security Hub act as a single common go-to dashboard."
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"The solution is used for risks, vulnerabilities, and compliance."
"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."
"I have not experienced any difficulties or issues with the stability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"It's got a lot of great features."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud can find potential phishing links and malicious code in data at rest."
"The pricing is good."
 

Cons

"The solution will only give you insight if you have configure rule enabled. It should work more like Prisma Cloud and Dome9 which have a better approach."
"AWS Security Hub's configuration and integration are areas where it lacks and needs to improve."
"The telemetry doesn't always go into the control center. When you have multiple instances running in AWS, you need a control tower to take feeds from Security Hub and analyze your results. Sometimes exemptions aren't passed between the control tower and Security Hub. The configuration gets mixed up or you don't get the desired results."
"There is room for improvement in implementing AI capabilities. It would be beneficial for Security Hub to implement preventative measures and to directly apply recommendations instead of just suggesting them."
"AWS Security Hub should improve the time it takes to update. It takes a long period of time when updating. It can take 24 hours sometimes to update. Additionally, when integrating this solution with more security tools, takes time."
"It is not flexible for multi-cloud environments."
"Security needs to be measured based on their own criteria. We can't add custom criteria specific to our organization. For example, having an S3 bucket publicly available might be flagged as a critical alert, but it might not be critical in a sandbox environment. So, it gets flagged as critical, which becomes a false positive. So, customization options and creating custom dashboards would be areas for improvement."
"Shortening the response time for support tickets, particularly in production issues, could make the service more efficient."
"They could always work to make the pricing a bit lower."
"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."
"Most customer teams need more training on this type of product."
"Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something."
"Agent features need to be improved. They support agents through Azure Arc or Workbench. Sometimes, we are not able to get correct signals from the machines on which we have installed these agents. We are not able to see how many are currently reporting to Azure Security Center, and how many are currently not reporting. For example, we have 1,000 machines, and we have enrolled 1,000 OMS agents on these machines to collect the log. When I look at the status, even though at some places, it shows that it is connected, but when I actually go and check, I'm not getting any alerts from those. There are some discrepancies on the agent, and the agent features are not up to the mark."
"However, some Copilot features aren't available in the GCP environment. This is something we hope will be addressed in the future."
"My experience with Microsoft Defender for Cloud has been largely negative due to a poor user experience."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost is based on the number of compliances, core checks, and services required, and for more than 10,000 recommendations, the charge is just one dollar."
"There are multiple subscription models, like yearly, monthly, and packaged."
"The pricing is fine. It is not an expensive tool."
"Security Hub is not an expensive solution."
"AWS Security Hub's pricing is pretty reasonable."
"The price of the solution is not very competitive but it is reasonable."
"The price of AWS Security Hub is average compared to other solutions."
"AWS Security Hub is not an expensive tool. I would consider it to be a cheap solution. AWS Security Hub follows the PAYG pricing model, meaning you will have to pay for whatever you use."
"There are improvements that have to be made to the licensing. Currently, for servers, it has to be done by grouping the servers on a single subscription... We don't have an option whereby, if all those resources are in one subscription, we can have each of the individual servers subject to different planning."
"It has global licensing. It comes with multiple licenses since there are around 50,000 people (in our organization) who look at it."
"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."
"There are two different plans. We're using the secure basic plan, but we have used the end security plan as well. There are additional costs, but it gives us more functionalities compared to the basic plan."
"While we pay for any additional features, the pricing seems competitive, though I am not involved in the specific cost details."
"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."
"There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) solutions are best for your needs.
868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186927 - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 16, 2015
Cybereason vs. Interset vs. SQRRL
Capture DB - they all use NoSQL db and hence solve the ad hoc query and 'go back in time' problem with current best of breed SIEM and DLP solutions that rely on real time analysis of incoming logs (and don't store them). This means deeper and quicker iterative threat analysis and assessment…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise45
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Azure Sentinel or AWS Security Hub?
We like that Azure Sentinel does not require as much maintenance as legacy SIEMs that are on-premises. Azure Sentinel is auto-scaling - you will not have to worry about performance impact, you will...
What do you like most about AWS Security Hub?
The most valuable features of the solution are the scanning of all the cloud environments and most of the compliances available in the cloud.
What needs improvement with AWS Security Hub?
Regarding how Amazon can improve AWS Security Hub, they have numerous services that are discriminated individually and grouped into packages. However, the sheer number of services can be overwhelmi...
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 do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edmunds, Frame.io, GoDaddy, Realtor.com
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Security Hub vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.