IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

IBM and Microsoft are both solutions in the Vulnerability Management category. IBM is ranked #52, while Microsoft is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.1. IBM holds a 0.5% mindshare in VM, compared to Microsoft’s 5.6% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of IBM 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 Apr 6, 2025

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment and Microsoft Defender for Cloud compete in security solutions with each having specific strengths. IBM Guardium has an edge in vulnerability assessment, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud integrates better within Microsoft platforms.

Features: IBM Guardium offers robust data protection, regulatory compliance, and detailed monitoring. Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides advanced threat protection, cloud-based security features, and seamless integration across Microsoft platforms.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Defender for Cloud benefits from easy deployment within the Microsoft ecosystem using Azure's infrastructure, along with effective customer support. IBM Guardium's deployment is more complex, requiring specialized knowledge, and although its support is comprehensive, deployment can be challenging.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Guardium involves higher setup costs due to its configuration needs but offers significant ROI from data protection. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is competitively priced, particularly for existing Microsoft customers, and provides effective ROI through cloud-native capabilities and subscription models.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 851,823 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 May 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.6%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is 0.5%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 5.6%, up from 4.8% 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

reviewer1714710

CTA\Owner at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

Worthwhile from the regulatory requirements and analytics perspective, but is expensive and not easy to use

We are a full security base integration and application business. We help with implementation and deployments. I used Guardium to help with a cloud migration to check and do some validation for a client's data landscape and services so that they made sure that they were all secure in overall…

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

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

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

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

"Zafran is an excellent tool."

"The most valuable feature is that it provides a simple English recommendation on actions that you need to take once a vulnerability is discovered."

"The reporting features are good and there are many built-in reports that can be quickly configured."

"It helped with some of the regulatory requirements. It also helped with some of the security analytics and analysis. It was worthwhile from that perspective."

"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."

"The solution is quite good and addresses many security gaps."

"The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security. It has made the cloud environment more secure, thanks to all the recommendations we can get."

"It has seamless integration with any of the services I mentioned, on Azure, such as IaaS platforms, virtual machines, applications, or databases, because it's an in-house product from Microsoft within the Azure ecosystem."

"When we started out, our secure score was pretty low. We adopted some of the recommendations that Security Center set out and we were able to make good progress on improving it. It had been in the low thirties and is now in the upper eighties."

"Provides a very good view of the entire security setup of your organization."

"The most valuable feature is that it's intuitive. It's very intuitive."

"The UX and UI are very good. Users have more of a taste for Microsoft UI."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud pros

Cons

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

"It was not as easy to use. The user-friendliness of it was somewhat lower than what I was expecting. It was also lacking in terms of the ease of the setup. There should be an automatic agent for deployment."

"The interface could be improved by having sub-groups of tests, ultimately making the process of collecting tests faster."

"Building policies is not that easy. There are some things that are turned off by default, for example, displaying values."

"The pricing could be improved, as it is somewhat high for smaller companies."

"For Kubernetes, I was using Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS). To see that whatever is getting deployed into AKS goes through the correct checks and balances in terms of affinities and other similar aspects and follows all the policies, we had to use a product called Stackrox. At a granular level, the built-in policies were good for Kubernetes, but to protect our containers from a coding point of view, we had to use a few other products. For example, from a programming point of view, we were using Checkmarx for static code analysis. For CIS compliance, there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, we had to use other plugins to see that the CIS benchmarks are compliant. There are CIS benchmarks for Kubernetes on AWS and GCP, but there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, Azure Security Center fell short from the regulatory compliance point of view, and we had to use one more product. We ended up with two different dashboards. We had Azure Security Center, and we had Stackrox that had its own dashboard. The operations team and the security team had to look at two dashboards, and they couldn't get an integrated piece. That's a drawback of Azure Security Center. Azure Security Center should provide APIs so that we can integrate its dashboard within other enterprise dashboards, such as the PowerBI dashboard. We couldn't get through these aspects, and we ended up giving Reader security permission to too many people, which was okay to some extent, but when we had to administer the users for the Stackrox portal and Azure Security Center, it became painful."

"Most of the time, when we log into the support, we don't get a chance to interact with Microsoft employees directly, except having it go to outsource employees of Microsoft. The initial interaction has not been that great because outsourced companies cannot provide the kind of quality or technical expertise that we look for. We have a technical manager from Microsoft, but they are kind of average unless we make noise and ask them to escalate. We then can get the right people and the right solution, but it definitely takes time."

"The range of workloads is broad, but we'd love to add more workloads and make it a single security solution that covers all those workloads."

"The pricing could be better."

"If they had an easier way to display all the vulnerabilities of the machines affected and remediation steps on one screen rather than having to dive deep into each of them, that would be a lot easier."

"The vulnerabilities are duplicated many times."

"After getting a recommendation, it takes time for the solution to refresh properly to show that the problem has been eliminated."

More Microsoft Defender for Cloud cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"One thing not advantageous for it was that it was a little bit more expensive. I would rate it one out of five in terms of pricing."

"Understanding the costs of cloud services can be complicated at first. As with a lot of things in the cloud, it can be quite hard to understand the end cost, but it becomes clearer over time. Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something. It is clever marketing, and there is room for improvement there. There should be clarity from the start."

"Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."

"The product's pricing policy is generally favorable."

"The solution is expensive, and I rate it a five to six out of ten."

"The licensing cost per server is $15 per month."

"Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."

"Defender for Cloud is pretty costly for a single line. It's incredibly high to pay monthly for security per server. The cost is considerable for an enterprise with 500-plus virtual machines, and the monthly bill can spike."

"We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."

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

851,823 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

39%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

14%

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?

I find that the pricing for Zafran aligns well with the comprehensive features it offers. The asset and user-based li...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Zafran Security?

Zafran is a new startup. Features are continuously being added or improved. 1) Continued integrations with existing (...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?

We connect this to our vulnerability scanner as input, our security tools to better determine risk, and our change ma...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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 cost is generally reasonable. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Plan 2 costs $15 per server, per month. For a normal c...

See all answers

Comparisons

Wiz Code vs Zafran Security

Compared 51% of the time

Vulcan Cyber vs Zafran Security

Compared 20% of the time

ServiceNow Security Operations vs Zafran Security

Compared 12% of the time

Tenable Vulnerability Management vs Zafran Security

Compared 10% of the time

Armis vs Zafran Security

Compared 7% of the time

More Zafran Security Competitors

Qualys VMDR vs IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

Compared 33% of the time

Tenable Vulnerability Management vs IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

Compared 27% of the time

Tenable Nessus vs IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

Compared 25% of the time

More IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment Competitors

AWS GuardDuty vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 20% of the time

Wiz vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 14% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Defender XDR vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Compared 5% 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

Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)

May 2025

Download Zafran Security product report

Buyer's Guide

Vulnerability Management

May 2025

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment report

Download IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Cloud

May 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

IBM

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

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment scans data infrastructures (databases, data warehouses and big data environments) to detect vulnerabilities, and suggests remedial actions. The solution identifies exposures such as missing patches, weak passwords, unauthorized changes and misconfigured privileges.

IBM

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

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

Buyer's Guide

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud

April 2025

Free Report: IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,823 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment 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.