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

Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs SUSE Rancher comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)
Ranking in Container Security
17th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SUSE Rancher
Ranking in Container Security
32nd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is 0.8%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE Rancher is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Shaijith KB - PeerSpot reviewer
Professional services boost confidence but pricing and user-friendliness need attention
We have multiple solutions such as SimpliVity, Nutanix, and DXRail, which are all part of our Ansible-based system. It gives us more confidence and we can control our groups effectively. The solution is not particularly user-friendly for novice administrators, making it challenging to understand certain aspects. Templates are not readily available, requiring users to build their own worksheets and everything from scratch. This is a main decentralization we observe compared to VMware. We have tested various solutions including Rancher, RHEL, Canonical from SUSE, and the bare metal version from RHEL direct. Since pricing is not a major concern, we chose the best fit for our application, which was specifically designed for this particular platform.
Sachin Deorah - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables seamless local Kubernetes development and quick deployment to the cloud
Rancher Desktop provides support for Kubernetes setup on local machines. It allows us to run Kubernetes as per our requirement, and the desktop application offers a good UI. We use Rancher Desktop for local development, testing APIs locally, and it helps to seamlessly publish to the cloud. This makes it a valuable tool for developers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of AKS are scalability, deployability, and automation."
"It is appealing to us due to its complexity, which aligns well with our requirements."
"The product’s most valuable features are ease of use and automation."
"We are not yet fully public cloud-native, however, Azure Kubernetes Service promises interesting scalability and flexibility for the future."
"The integration with Azure's security capabilities is very good. The Azure-managed identity and integration with the Azure application gateway for App Ingress are valuable features. Additionally, it is a very stable tool."
"In your experience, how has the integration of Azure Active Directory with Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) helped enhance the security of application?"
"It is easy to maintain the solution."
"AKS as a service is very good when you need to leverage applications or functions with much variability in their usage because you're trying to be as efficient as you can with resources."
"Rancher Desktop provides support for Kubernetes setup on local machines."
"The most valuable features of SUSE Rancher include the user interface and the display features."
"Rancher Desktop provides support for Kubernetes setup on local machines."
 

Cons

"The costs are rising rapidly, and we have not seen any cost reductions by moving to Azure."
"Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is not up to optimal standards when it comes to capturing logs and visualization."
"If any customer uses a traditional code, the code-level changes take a lot of time."
"The application firewall is lacking some features and there is room for enhancement."
"I would like to see the stability get more synchronized."
"One improvement I'd like to see is a better user interface for developers, enabling easier operation without relying heavily on command lines."
"This is a fairly expensive solution, which can make it prohibitive for smaller organizations."
"There are some limitations with the tutor version, particularly in terms of using a lot of free audio. The private level also has restrictions, limiting the number of audio files you can access to just 50. If you want more, you need to contact support."
"Additional features for a paid solution should be included, such as more detailed insights, better graphics, and an improved user interface."
"Some initial setup and configuration were required by the admin side for enabling security policies, which were not supported initially."
"Some initial setup and configuration were required by the admin side for enabling security policies, which were not supported initially."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not expensive."
"I like the pricing and find it to be in the mid-range, and I would rate it as five out of ten."
"It is a cost-effective solution."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The product is expensive in terms of scalability."
"The pricing of the solution is dependent on the choice of virtual machines, specifically the amount of memory required. There are various options available, ranging from around twenty-five to even more choices to select from. This flexibility allows you to customize the pricing based on your specific needs. From my perspective, virtual machines in the cloud tend to be slightly more expensive compared to virtual machines offered directly by data centers. However, this cost is offset by the benefits of a managed service. Taking the overall picture into account, the managed service approach is advantageous. The pricing for the platform can vary, typically ranging from three hundred euros per month to two thousand euros per month, depending on the specific requirements and setup you choose."
"As you scale your operations, AKS becomes more cost-effective."
"The pricing of the solution is same as Azure Stack."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)?
The platform's high scalability is one of its biggest advantages.
What needs improvement with Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)?
Could you please tell what areas of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) you think could be improved or enhanced? It doesn't necessarily have to be something advanced. Perhaps there are some minor things...
What is your primary use case for Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)?
Could you please describe your customers' usual use cases for Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)?
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SUSE Rancher?
Rancher is free of cost for us as it is open source. However, there might be costs involved when using Kubernetes on cloud services.
What needs improvement with SUSE Rancher?
I believe additional features for a paid solution should be included, such as more detailed insights, better graphics, and an improved user interface.
What is your primary use case for SUSE Rancher?
My primary use case for SUSE Rancher is managing Kubernetes clusters, allocating them to different users, and monitoring workloads. I manage all cluster-related activities through Rancher.
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. SUSE Rancher and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.