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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Trivy comparison

 

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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Container Security
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (9th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (1st), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Microsoft Security Suite (8th), Compliance Management (5th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (2nd)
Trivy
Ranking in Container Security
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 6.6%, down from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trivy is 6.1%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Trivy6.1%
Microsoft Defender for Cloud6.6%
Other87.3%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Utsav Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Maintain operational efficiency by detecting misconfigurations and vulnerabilities
The vulnerability scanning feature is excellent as it supports various container capabilities like Docker and Sharma. It also offers repository scanning in the source code domain, allowing pre-push code scans. The misconfiguration detection works well for CloudFormation, Docker files, and Terraform. Its compliance support, like NIST, ensures that configurations align with standards. Trivy helps me significantly detect misconfigurations missed by the ops engineers or in Terraform by the naked eye. It ensures that my deployments are free of misconfigurations and vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a valuable tool that integrates seamlessly with Azure Policy and our Security SIEM, simplifying implementation and enhancing security posture."
"The most valuable feature is the regulatory compliance aspect, where we utilize predefined initiatives like NIST."
"We saw improvement from a regulatory compliance perspective due to having a single dashboard."
"The solution is up-to-date with the latest updates and identified threats."
"The most valuable feature is the regulatory compliance aspect, where we utilize predefined initiatives like NIST. Alert management is another useful feature. Alerts are directly integrated with our email or DevOps board for easy viewing, allowing us to identify problem areas efficiently."
"The technical support is very good."
"The solution's coordinated detection and response across devices and identities is impressive because it is complete."
"The security alerts and correlated alerts are most valuable. It correlates the logs and gives us correlated alerts, which can be fed into any security information and event management (SIEM) tool. It is an analyzed correlation tool for monitoring security. It gives us alerts when there is any kind of unauthorized access, or when there is any malfunctioning in multifactor authentication (MFA). If our Azure is connected with Azure Security Center, we get to know what types of authentication are happening in our infra."
"Trivy's open source nature and wide functionality are incredibly valuable."
"Trivy's open source nature and wide functionality are incredibly valuable."
"I rate Trivy a nine out of ten."
"Trivy's ability to scan files, images, GitHub repositories, Infrastructure as Code like Terraform, and Kubernetes is valuable."
"Trivy is most valuable for its ability to scan all repository files and dependencies."
"One of the great features of Trivy is that it helps me scan items such as AWS credentials and GCP service accounts."
"It's customizable, allowing me to add any rules and format HTML templates as I wish."
"What I find valuable is the ease of setup with Trivy, including pre-defined operators that require minimal configuration."
 

Cons

"Consistency is the area where the most improvement is needed. For example, there are some areas where the UI is not uniform across the board."
"I felt that there was disconnection in terms of understanding the UI. The communication for moving from the old UI to the new UI could be improved. It was a bit awkward."
"The most significant areas for improvement are in the security of our identity and endpoints and the posture of the cloud environment. Better protection for our cloud users and cloud apps is always welcome."
"Sometimes, it's very difficult to determine when I need Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a special resource group or certain kinds of products. That's not an issue directly with the product, though."
"The cost is always a concern, but overall, it's not too bad because it is easy to use and pretty friendly."
"Integration into other third-party products, particularly those from tier three vendors like ManageEngine and Hexcode, has proven difficult."
"The overview provides you with good information, but if you want more details, there is a lot more customization to do, which requires knowledge of the other supporting solutions."
"Pricing could be improved. There are limited options based on pricing for the government."
"A dynamic scanning capability during runtime would be a significant advantage."
"In our CI/CD pipelines, Trivy lacks built-in functionality for report analysis."
"One drawback I have observed with Trivy is the difficulty in building or integrating a UI, particularly for an operator in the NetSuite example."
"Trivy generates many false positives, flagging non-existent vulnerabilities."
"The only problem is that Trivy does not support reporting features such as generating reports in CSV, which is useful for auditing and reporting."
"Having little experience can hinder the ability to connect it to a user-friendly UI effectively."
"For malware detection, I need to use two tools: Trivy as my anomaly scanner and ClamAV. I am integrating these two tools into the CI pipeline. If both malware and anomaly detection could be managed by one tool, I would not need to depend on two tools. That would be my suggestion."
"The main area for improvement is in differentiating between OS and application-based vulnerabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate Microsoft Defender a three out of ten for affordability. The price could be a little lower."
"The cost of the license is based on the subscriptions that you have."
"There are improvements that have to be made to the licensing. Currently, for servers, it has to be done by grouping the servers on a single subscription... We don't have an option whereby, if all those resources are in one subscription, we can have each of the individual servers subject to different planning."
"It has global licensing. It comes with multiple licenses since there are around 50,000 people (in our organization) who look at it."
"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."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters."
"The pricing and licensing of Microsoft Defender for Cloud have been good for us. We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise45
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

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 across your ecosystem. It also has great remote workforce capabilities and supports a...
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
What needs improvement with Trivy?
Trivy's marketing and awareness need improvement. Not everyone knows about it, which isn't ideal given its capabilities. There's potential to integrate AI and machine learning for enhanced function...
What is your primary use case for Trivy?
I use Trivy ( /products/trivy-reviews ) to scan code for vulnerabilities before deployment. Our projects, which are developed by different developers, involve various dependencies and third-party c...
What advice do you have for others considering Trivy?
I recommend Trivy to others due to its powerful and useful features. However, I suggest increasing its marketing to raise awareness. I rate Trivy an eight out of ten.
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Trivy and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.