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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs SUSE NeuVector comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (5th), Cloud and Data Center Security (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (1st)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Container Security
7th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (8th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (5th)
SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
17th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.7%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 6.7%, down from 7.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 2.3%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.
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.
Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
Good value for money; great for policy management
Our model of deployment for this solution is on-premises. For people looking into this solution and trying to use it for the first time, I'd say make your life easier by using the SUSE product as well on top of your community scale stack. That makes your integration points a lot easier and smoother. I would also say during your initial setup, make sure that your clusters are already in terms of the capabilities with the version required. I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this rating is that what they offer is solid, but they could expand their service and add more features just to make more things integrated into an enterprise itself.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The monitoring tool has comprehensive monitoring features."
"Singularity Cloud Native Security provides us with a platform to scan instances when they are getting created, and the dashboard helps us to identify the critical issues."
"The most valuable features of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is better than other vendors because we get all the cloud-related, data center-related information."
"We use the infrastructure as code scanning, which is good."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is on top of protecting ephemeral workloads."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security provides email alerts and ranks issues based on severity, such as high, critical, etc., that help us prioritize issues."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"Defender for Cloud provides a complete DevOps security package for cloud services."
"Defender for Cloud provides a prioritized list of remediations for security issues, reducing risk and improving security operations."
"I have not experienced any difficulties or issues with the stability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"The solution's coordinated detection and response across devices and identities is impressive because it is complete."
"The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available."
"When you have commissioned Defender, you have these things visible already on your dashboard. This gives the efficiency to the people to do their actual work rather than bothering about the email, sorting out the email, or looking at it through an ITSM solution, whey they have to look at the description and use cases. Efficiency increases with this optimized, ready-made solution since you don't need to invest in something externally. You can start using the dashboard and auditing capability provided from day one. Thus, you have fewer costs with a more optimized, easier-to-use solution, providing operational efficiency for your team."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a valuable tool that integrates seamlessly with Azure Policy and our Security SIEM, simplifying implementation and enhancing security posture."
"Defender for Cloud is a plug-and-play solution that provides continuous posture management once enabled."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
 

Cons

"A few YouTube videos could be helpful. There isn't a lot of information out there to look at."
"There can be a specific type of alert showing that a new type of risk has been identified."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"I believe the UI/UX updates for SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security have room for improvement."
"I would prefer to see SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security develop into a single pane of glass for ASPM and CSPM."
"For SentinelOne, improvements could be made in managing Internet dependency as cloud-based operations can pose challenges in environments with limited connectivity."
"Once all components, including the cloud piece and container runtime piece, integrate further and incorporate an AI layer for better comprehension, it will greatly enhance the utility of Singularity Cloud Security."
"I would like to see more connectors and plugins with other platforms."
"I would suggest building a single product that addresses endpoint server protection, attack surface, and everything else in one solution. That is the main disadvantage with the product. If we are incorporating some features, we end up in a situation where this solution is for the server, and that one is for the client, or this is for identity, and that is for our application. They're not bundling it. Commercially, we can charge for different licenses, but on the implementation side, it's tough to help our end-customer understand which product they're getting."
"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 product was a bit complex to set up earlier, however, it is a bit streamlined now."
"The solution could improve by being more intuitive and easier to use requiring less technical knowledge."
"No possibility to write or edit any capability."
"Azure's system could be more on point like AWS support. For example, if I have an issue with AWS, I create a support ticket, then I get a call or a message. With Azure support, you raise a ticket, and somebody calls back depending on their availability and the priority, which might not align with your business priority."
"The vulnerabilities are duplicated many times."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"Using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features between two clusters and could be improved."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"However, I found that the support in Egypt was not very qualified, and there was a need to upgrade to a higher support layer to solve my issues."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is on the costlier side."
"The price depends on the extension of the solution that you want to buy. If you want to buy just EDR, the price is less. XDR is a little bit more expensive. There are going to be different add-ons for Singularity."
"PingSafe is fairly priced."
"It's not expensive. The product is in its initial growth stages and appears more competitive compared to others. It comes in different variants, and I believe the enterprise version costs around $55 per user per year. I would rate it a five, somewhere fairly moderate."
"PingSafe is not very expensive compared to Prisma Cloud, but it's also not that cheap. However, because of its features, it makes sense to us as a company. It's fairly priced."
"The features included in PingSafe justify its price point."
"PingSafe is affordable."
"I would rate the cost a seven out of ten with ten being the most costly."
"This is a worldwide service and depending on the country, there will be different prices."
"The pricing model for most plans is generally good, but the cost of the new Defender for Storage plan is high and should be revisited, as it could lead to disabling desirable security features due to cost."
"The licensing is straightforward but can become expensive if you cover everything. You must balance the cost against the importance of what needs covering."
"This solution is more cost-effective than some competing products. My understanding is that it is based on the number of integrations that you have, so if you have fewer subscriptions then you pay less for the service."
"I rate Microsoft Defender a three out of ten for affordability. The price could be a little lower."
"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."
"The solution is expensive, and I rate it a five to six out of ten."
"Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
I don't handle the price part, but it isn't more expensive than Palo Alto Prisma Cloud. It's not cheap, but it is wor...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
There is scope for more application security posture management features. Additionally, the runtime protection needs ...
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...
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
What do you like most about NeuVector?
The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NeuVector?
SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution. You have to pay for the support.
What needs improvement with NeuVector?
One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node por...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
NeuVector
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. SUSE NeuVector and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.