CloudCheckr vs Cloudability comparison

Apptio and Spot - A Flexera company are both solutions in the Cloud Cost Management category. Apptio is ranked #3 with an average rating of 7.7, while Spot - A Flexera company is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0. Apptio holds a 7.1% mindshare in CCM, compared to Spot - A Flexera company’s 3.0% mindshare. Additionally, 78% of Apptio users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 77% of Spot - A Flexera company users who would recommend it.

Cloudability

Read 17 Cloudability reviews

1,765 Views
1,712 Comparison Views

78% willing to recommend

CloudCheckr

Read 10 CloudCheckr reviews

1,220 Views
622 Comparison Views

77% willing to recommend

Cloudability

CloudCheckr

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 2025

Cloudability and CloudCheckr are major players in the cloud management sector. Cloudability seems to have an advantage in AWS integration due to its depth in detailed cost analysis and reserved instance planning, while CloudCheckr offers better multi-cloud compatibility, making it appealing for varied cloud environments.

Features: Cloudability offers comprehensive metrics for financial management, reserved instance planning, and customized dashboards. Its integration with AWS is robust, with features such as tagging capabilities and rightsizing recommendations. CloudCheckr excels with strong billing capabilities, security insights, and the ability to scale easily across AWS, Azure, and GCP.

Room for Improvement: Cloudability users suggest enhancements in user onboarding, API documentation, and long-term forecasting. Discrepancies in billing data and automation needs in data handling are noted areas needing attention. It could also broaden its focus to include more cloud providers. CloudCheckr needs performance improvements with large datasets and better integration with Azure and GCP, while its non-AWS security compliance could be enhanced. Reporting and user guidance in both products could be improved.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products provide public cloud support, but only CloudCheckr extends to private clouds. Cloudability's support varies, with some users finding it inconsistent and lacking real-time options. CloudCheckr also receives mixed feedback, particularly outside AWS, requiring active customer engagement for effective support and deployment.

Pricing and ROI: Cloudability is perceived as expensive for large-scale users but can provide significant ROI through cost-saving recommendations, with some users claiming a 9x ROI. Its usage-based pricing model may deter smaller operations. In contrast, CloudCheckr is deemed fairly priced, delivering consistent value adaptable to diverse cloud usage structures. While both offer ROI through predictive analytics and reserved instance savings, Cloudability's cost may limit its appeal to smaller clients, whereas CloudCheckr remains reasonably priced across various scales.

To learn more, read our detailed CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

Cloudability

Ranking in Cloud Cost Management

3rd

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

CloudCheckr

Ranking in Cloud Cost Management

11th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Management (24th), Managed Cloud Services (5th), AI Observability (76th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Cloud Cost Management category, the mindshare of Cloudability is 7.1%, down from 12.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CloudCheckr is 3.0%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Cost Management Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Cloudability	7.1%
CloudCheckr	3.0%
Other	89.9%

Cloud Cost Management

Featured Reviews

reviewer2795433

Enterprise Cloud Operations Lead at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Gained multi-cloud cost visibility and have optimized spend with detailed reports and rightsizing

The IAM feature is something that we struggle with using. IBM, the company that runs Cloudability, released the Groups feature back in the summer of 2025. While Groups can be used in some parts of the tool, it can't be used across the entire tool. I've found that Groups is basically unusable because if it can't be used everywhere, you would have to run both group-based access control and direct user-based access control at the same time, which doesn't make any sense. The Groups feature has improved over time, but it's still not something we feel we can use on an everyday basis, so the IAM section remains an issue right now. Most of the tool is very well-functioning and developed, and that's the only real improvement area that we've seen.

Read full review

Karan Saini

Dev Ops Engineer at a construction company with 11-50 employees

Cost governance has improved and cost visibility now drives daily compliant optimization

CloudCheckr is an excellent tool overall. The feature that stands out is how it enables cost savings and efficiency. The cost visibility and reporting are really valuable, and the dashboard is informative and enables good decision-making. The actionable recommendations are beneficial, such as the auto-generated suggestions for optimization. The built-in security and compliance checks, along with scheduled reports, save a lot of manual effort and keep both engineering and finance teams aligned. CloudCheckr has been great and has helped solve problems by ensuring proper compliance. It does not just show data; it highlights actionable items for cost savings, security improvements, and compliance gaps. Scheduled reports are received on a regular basis according to defined schedules, providing more insights that can be shared with leadership and finance teams to ensure alignment. This results in a better picture where everyone is aligned and focused on growth while effectively and efficiently using financial resources. CloudCheckr has enabled an average cost saving of approximately 25% from the last year, and this occurred while also increasing the scale of production. It has significantly reduced manual efforts that would otherwise be spent manually checking costs, tracking where spending is occurring, and verifying whether everything is properly optimized.

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

"One of the standout features of the solution is its groups and views functionality. The solution is highly-stable. The solution is highly-scalable. The customer support is good. They can be easily contacted. The initial setup is straightforward. It's an excellent tool, especially when dealing with multiple clouds. It streamlines the process, eliminating the need to check each cloud individually."

"It has already given us insight into how to optimize. So, we are now ramping up steadily its usage."

"The tool helps us to resize on AWS correctly."

"The most crucial feature in reducing my cloud costs has been the rightsizing recommendations, along with the dashboards that track reserved instance spending coverage and utilization. As for Cloudability's integration with our existing cloud infrastructure, it's not integrated directly into our AWS infrastructure but rather reads and pulls data from it, providing valuable insights and analysis for cost management."

"Cloudability positively impacts my organization by allowing for greater cost observability, which then drives better spending decisions and reduces costs."

"It provides us visibility, then we can turn around and can give the leadership team more information, which we could not previously give them."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to create reports and dashboards."

"We use the product to get a detailed level of transparency on the cloud strengths."

More Cloudability pros

"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."

"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."

"CloudCheckr has enabled an average cost saving of approximately 25% from the last year, and this occurred while also increasing the scale of production."

"The solution is scalable for our purposes."

"The initial setup is straightforward."

"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."

"The best feature I like about CloudCheckr CMx High Security is its simplicity. I love that it's not rocket science to use the solution. Even if you're not familiar with the cloud, you can easily figure out how to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You can use AWS, you can use Azure, and you can use GCP with the solution because the integration is quite simple. You can also use multi-cloud with it, and you could see the billing part. You'll have complete visibility into your cost which I love about the solution. I also love that data on any security issues and vulnerabilities are available on the go with CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You don't need to do anything different. Just run the scan and you'll have all these open findings in the tool, in terms of the priority level, so if it's critical, it will tell you, "It's critical," and you need to fix it right away."

"CloudCheckr has impacted my organization positively by making things easier and saving time, approximately three hours a week."

More CloudCheckr pros

Cons

"Cloudability needs to focus on more cloud providers."

"Enhancements could be made in the user interface and customization, and leveraging GenAI would be an area for improvement in Cloudability."

"Right now, what we're doing is we are manually putting the data in it, which is something which we don't like about Cloudability."

"Cloudability needs to improve on data collection from cloud sources."

"We have dealt with a few technical support people where we ask for one thing and they might not deliver straightaway. It seems like they are a stretched across multiple customers."

"There is always room for improvement in education and training. We are not that mature in terms of our automation. It could help us identify where we could optimize in terms of build."

"My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was adequate, but it could be made better."

"The dashboard needs to include more graphs per team to show what individual teams are spending in a given time period."

More Cloudability cons

"Some aspects could be made more customizable, such as the dashboard and UI."

"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."

"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."

"What needs to be improved in CloudCheckr CMx High Security is integration. All the clouds are going quite fast, for example, all the cloud providers: Microsoft, Google, etc. CloudCheckr CMx High Security is good with AWS, no doubt about it, but with Azure and Google Cloud, I find that the solution is slow in that direction. If the vendor planned for CloudCheckr CMx High Security to be automated just for AWS, then it does make sense. If not, if the vendor is also targeting good integration with Google and Microsoft, then CloudCheckr CMx High Security integration needs improvement, in particular, it has to be faster. At the moment, its integration with Azure is not as good as its integration with AWS. With GCP, integration is nowhere."

"The solution must improve its user interface."

"CloudCheckr CMx High Security is complex. There are a lot of menus, and if you do not know what you are looking for you can get lost. However, the interface is self-explanatory. It's easy to understand where to go to get what you want."

"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."

"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."

More CloudCheckr cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My team is one of the most expensive teams, and we look at it quite a bit. We have probably easily saved around $400,000 USD a year."

"It justifies the cost and is worth it."

"The price of the license or the usage is a percentage of the top consumption. So it varies from year to year."

"We have seen ROI with the reserved instances, and having the ability to predict what reserved instances you can get. We can save tens of thousands of dollars, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in some cases."

"Cloudability is a bit expensive."

"The cost is on par with other providers."

"The solution is reasonably priced."

"A license is needed to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security, but because we are a managed service provider, the price of the license would vary. It depends on the type of cloud users we have, for example, it would be some type of percentage or monthly billing, etc."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

10%

Retailer

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Educational Organization

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	7

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cloudability?

The most crucial feature in reducing my cloud costs has been the rightsizing recommendations, along with the dashboards that track reserved instance spending coverage and utilization. As for Clouda...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cloudability?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was adequate, but it could be made better.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Cloudability?

It would be beneficial if we could use resource tags to provide more fine-grained visibility.

See all answers

What do you like most about CloudCheckr ?

The recommendation section is pretty helpful.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudCheckr ?

The pricing and licensing are quite convenient. I am not certain about the exact costs involved because another team handles that aspect. Overall, the pricing was quite convenient and represented g...

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudCheckr ?

Some aspects could be made more customizable, such as the dashboard and UI. Some features may be too advanced and may have a learning curve, potentially lacking customization. Overall, CloudCheckr ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Apptio One vs Cloudability

Compared 19% of the time

IBM Turbonomic vs Cloudability

Compared 8% of the time

VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth vs Cloudability

Compared 8% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs Cloudability

Compared 6% of the time

Ternary vs Cloudability

Compared 4% of the time

More Cloudability Competitors

Flexera Cloud Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 14% of the time

IBM Turbonomic vs CloudCheckr

Compared 8% of the time

Apptio One vs CloudCheckr

Compared 6% of the time

Snyk vs CloudCheckr

Compared 6% of the time

AWS Trusted Advisor vs CloudCheckr

Compared 6% of the time

More CloudCheckr Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cloudability

January 2026

Download Cloudability product report

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr

January 2026

Download CloudCheckr product report

Also Known As

No data available

CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP

Overview

Cloudability is a financial management tool for monitoring and analyzing every cloud expense across any organization. It brings transparency to how and where organizations spend money on cloud resources, giving them the power to reap the most value from cloud usage possible. It aggregates expenditures into accessible and comprehensive reports, helps identify new opportunities for reducing spend and increasing cloud efficiency, offers budget alerts and recommendations via SMS and email, provides APIs for connecting cloud billing and usage data to any business or financial system, and more.

Apptio

CloudCheckr CMx High Security is a cloud management platform that provides complete visibility into cost and security issues. The primary use cases are day-to-day operations, cloud management, identifying open vulnerabilities and issues from a security perspective, and cost management and optimization.

The solution is praised for its stability, simplicity, ease of use, scalability, excellent technical support, and granular reporting. CloudCheckr CMx High Security provides priority-level data on security issues and vulnerabilities, making it easy to identify critical issues that need immediate attention.

Spot - A Flexera company

Sample Customers

Adobe, Uber, Pega, imgur, Pixable, Blackboard, Keboola, Avalara

Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability

December 2025

Free Report: CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability

Find out what your peers are saying about CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CloudCheckr vs. Cloudability report.

See our list of best Cloud Cost Management vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Cost 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.