C-Facts - Cloud Cost Management vs. ProsperOps

• Discover unassigned/hidden costs, assign them, and monitor
• Set budgets in 3 tier model and manage
• Automated compliance check on actual invoices as received by cloud providers
• Transparent invoices/cross-charging throughout 3 tier model
• Compliance check with financial controlling principles

Our firm spends the majority of its cloud budget on EC2 instances, Fargate deployments, and Lambda executions. Automated modifications to discount portfolios based on changes in workloads allow ProsperOops to handle our shifting workloads with ease. In order to meet our net cloud budget requirements, it always follows a high-quality SP (Savings Plan) Portfolio management strategy.

Incentivized

• The arbitrage strategy is effective. It's hard to believe how good the service is.
• It is a plug-and-forget approach for ProsperOps.
• It costs ProsperOps a percentage of the savings they make.

Incentivized

• The inclusion of RDS and Elasticache in cost management is something I'd be all for.
• When it comes to EC2 capacity reservations, ProsperOps only includes reserved instances in the region where we are located.

Incentivized

To see the aggregated costs on AWS billings, we may purchase the service through AWS Marketplace instead of viewing it in ProsperOps' dashboard. Now that we're using it for AWS, we're talking with our clients about adding it to Microsoft Azure, too, so that we can make use of the tool's cloud cost control and visibility capabilities.

Incentivized

• Our Effective Savings Rate has risen since we started using ProsperOps.
• Our AWS bill savings will cover the cost of the service.
• As much as 95.4% of our compute on-demand costs are covered by ProsperOps, and all of the savings are put to good use.

Incentivized