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

Chainguard Containers vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 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

Chainguard Containers
Ranking in Container Security
31st
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Container Image Security (1st)
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...
Ranking in Container Security
21st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Chainguard Containers is 1.2%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.1%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes2.1%
Chainguard Containers1.2%
Other96.7%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Abhishek - PeerSpot reviewer
DevSecOps at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Secured container workloads have reduced noise and monitoring improves with better debugging options
There are a lot of certain points where I feel that having the functionality of having debugging and ensuring that if I like, I can have the dependence of things where things I felt were lacking. Overall, the tool itself is kind of a great start for my evaluation. Because we are currently evaluating, we will have much more of an understanding of this tool again in the near future. If you talk about the concurrent processing, there is some bit of mismanagement happening in Chainguard Containers, which I do not like about it and which is kind of a deal breaker for me. On terms of scalability, because it is hosted on Kubernetes, there is no issue with the scaling and handling the infrastructure. However, when it comes to processing, there is a kind of a bit of a delay which happens. For most customers, this will not be relevant because what we deal with is the concurrency, and for us, every microsecond counts. So for our use case, perhaps that is a limitation, but for the overall market, I do not think that will be a great limitation for them. I'll say that having debugging possibilities can actually help to improvise Chainguard Containers more because as a product, I see a lack of visibility on that. Perhaps I might be wrong. I do not know exactly the way to do it. I am still in the evaluation process. That is one thing. The second thing is that there were no quick fixes available. That is problematic because if you are not able to configure it yourself, you should be able to get those quick fixes right away so that you can continue with your work. You need a detailed discipline if you want to debug those things because it is kind of a mess when you start debugging these containers when they fall. That is why I am still evaluating tools where I can get the balance of both.
Daniel Stevens - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at Galley
Offers easy management and container connection with HTTPS, but the support needs to improve
I have experience with the solution's setup in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and our company has assisted in the development of a cluster in a research department, but we didn't start from scratch because we have IT professionals who have installed Kubernetes across 12 nodes of a cluster and a new environment can be created for a new platform. I also had another setup experience of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes in Portugal where I had to implement the solution in a cluster of 22 computer servers, which was completed with assistance from the IT department of the company. The initial setup process of the solution can be considered as difficult. The setup process involves using the permissions, subnets and range of IPs, which makes it complex. Deploying Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes takes around eight to ten hours for new clusters. The solution's deployment can be divided into three parts. The first part involves OpenStack, where the cluster's resources need to be identified. The second part involves virtualizing assets and identifying other physical assets, for which OpenStack, Kubernetes, or OpenShift are used. The third part of the deployment involves dividing the networks into subnetworks and implementing automation to deploy the microservices using Helm. The number of professionals required for the solution's deployment depends upon the presence of automated scripts. Ideally, two or three professionals are required to set up Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best feature of Chainguard Containers is being distroless, and the main thing I liked about it is that they follow the SBOM process and the continuous rebuilds they were doing, and they were helping me to rapidly remediate the failures which were happening."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"The most beneficial security feature of the product revolves around the areas of vulnerability and configuration."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"It is easy to install and manage."
 

Cons

"Sometimes there are backend errors which we come across again and again, and there is a resolution, but there are pending tickets for it. That sucks sometimes."
"I do see that some features associated with the IAST part are not included in the tool, making it an area where improvements are required."
"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"The testing process could be improved."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."
"The solution's price could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."
"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."
"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."
"It's a costly solution"
"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Healthcare Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Chainguard Containers?
Currently, we are not paying for it. We are just evaluating right now, but we will get in discussion for that pricing and setup cost. So I cannot comment on that.
What needs improvement with Chainguard Containers?
There are a lot of certain points where I feel that having the functionality of having debugging and ensuring that if I like, I can have the dependence of things where things I felt were lacking. O...
What is your primary use case for Chainguard Containers?
I have been working in my current field for the last five and a half years. I have been evaluating Chainguard Containers for the last three months. I was looking for security and compliance, supply...
What needs improvement with Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
From an improvement perspective, I would like to create new policies in the tool, especially if it is deployed for the prevention part, but currently, we need to do it manually. I hear that Palo Al...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
I use the solution in my company for vulnerability management, configuration management, compliance, safety handling, and everything else.
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
The tool's policy management supports our company's compliance efforts since any corporate entity or enterprise must follow specific regulations, which include periodic analysis and configuration r...
 

Also Known As

No data available
StackRox
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
City National Bank, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, SentinelOne and others in Container Security. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.