Capgemini vs Hitachi Cyber
Capgemini and Hitachi Cyber are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Capgemini targets Enterprise organizations, while Hitachi Cyber serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Capgemini includes 3 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, Network), compared to 6 for Hitachi Cyber (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS).
Buyer brief
Capgemini and Hitachi Cyber are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Capgemini targets Enterprise organizations, while Hitachi Cyber serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Capgemini includes 3 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, Network), compared to 6 for Hitachi Cyber (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS).
Hitachi Cyber offers broader coverage (6 surfaces vs. 3). Capgemini may suit teams that need depth over breadth.
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Large enterprises that want a global services partner for MDR plus SOC transformation | Existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with |
| Price | Custom quote | Custom quote |
| Response authority | 2/6 actions · Configurable | 6/6 actions · Configurable |
| Stack | Works with existing stack | Works with existing stack |
| Data access | Reports only | Dashboards |
| Warranty | None listed | None listed |
- Best fit
- Large enterprises that want a global services partner for MDR plus SOC transformation
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 2/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Reports only
- Warranty
- None listed
- Best fit
- Existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 6/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
Detailed comparison
| FIELD | CapgeminiTECH-AGNOSTIC | Hitachi CyberTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| Fit | ||
| Target size | Enterprise | Mid-market, Enterprise |
| Sentiment | Mixed | Mixed |
| Your stack | ||
| Approach | Works with your tools | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | Customer endpoint security tools | CrowdStrikeSentinelOneMicrosoft Defender |
| SIEM integrations | Customer SIEM platforms Microsoft Sentinel | SplunkGoogle Chronicle Microsoft Sentinel |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: LimitedSaaSSaaS: LimitedNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Limited | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Covered |
| Response | ||
| Response type | Active Remediation | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Configurable |
| Response actions | ContainCustom playbooks | IsolateKill processContainDisable accountsQuarantineCustom playbooks |
| IR included | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Cost | ||
| Price range | Not published | Not published |
| Minimum seats | None | None |
| Breach warranty | – | – |
| More details | ||
| Requires own agent | No | No |
| Endpoints | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Cloud workloads | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Identity | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| SaaS apps | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| Network | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| OT/ICS | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Custom enterprise quote by service scope, technology stack, Cyber Defense Center model and transformation requirements. Public prices are not published. | Custom quote, not published. Sold direct. |
| Hidden cost warnings | Capgemini is a global services firm, so scope, tooling, response authority and transformation work should be specified precisely in the statement of work.. Public pages do not publish pricing, minimum terms, service credits, MTTD, MTTR or a contractual response SLA.. Microsoft Sentinel-powered Cyber Defense Centers may require separate Microsoft licensing and data-ingestion planning.. Threat hunting, DFIR, vulnerability management and offensive security are all public offers, but buyers should confirm which are included in the base MDR scope versus separate workstreams.. Public materials do not disclose log retention, raw data export rights or detection-content portability. | Pricing is fully custom, no public benchmarks to anchor negotiation. OT coverage routes through the new Krakow SOC and may change response timing if your assets sit elsewhere. Services span MDR, MSS and consulting under one roof, scope creep into adjacent services is easy |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Continuous Vigilance, Managed Detection and Response, Managed SOC, SOC Transformation, Cyber Defense Centers powered by Microsoft Sentinel, Custom cybersecurity services engagement | Annual, Multi-year |
| Channels | EmailPortalPhoneTeams | EmailPortalPhone |
| Data access | Reports only | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | – | ✓ |
| SOC regions | North AmericaEuropeAPACLATAMMEA | North AmericaEuropeAsia-Pacific |
| Onboarding | Not published. Capgemini positions the service as a custom enterprise engagement delivered through global Cyber Defense Centers. | Not published |
| Industry focus | Financial ServicesEnergyUtilitiesManufacturingAutomotiveHealthcarePublic SectorTelecommunicationsTechnology | Financial ServicesEnergyManufacturingTransportationHealthcarePublic Sector |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published |
| Community view | Capgemini has strong official evidence for enterprise-scale cybersecurity, Continuous Vigilance, MDR, Managed SOC, global Cyber Defense Centers, DFIR and threat hunting, but limited public buyer-review signal for the MDR service as a distinct product. Diligence should focus on service scope, response authority, tooling, staffing model, retention and pricing. | Hitachi Cyber has limited public review presence on G2, Gartner Peer Insights and PeerSpot for its MDR service specifically. Most independent coverage focuses on the Hitachi corporate parent or Above Security heritage rather than current customer experience. Buyers will need to lean on direct references. |
| Compliance | DORA | ISO 9001 (MSS)PCI QSA (Canada, US, LATAM, Caribbean)FIRST member |
| Certifications | – | ISO 9001PCI QSAFIRST |
| Founded | 1967 | 1999 |
| Data retention | Not published. Public Continuous Vigilance pages do not disclose default log retention, archive tiers or export rights. | Not published |
| API available | – | ✓ |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
FAQ
What is the main difference between Capgemini and Hitachi Cyber?
Capgemini is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Hitachi Cyber is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Capgemini covers 3 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 6 for Hitachi Cyber.
How do Capgemini and Hitachi Cyber differ in response capabilities?
Capgemini supports 2 autonomous actions (custom playbooks, network containment) and approval is configurable. Hitachi Cyber supports 6 autonomous actions (account disable, custom playbooks, endpoint isolation, file quarantine, network containment, process termination) and approval is configurable.
How does Capgemini pricing compare to Hitachi Cyber?
Capgemini pricing: Not published. Hitachi Cyber pricing: Not published. Watch for with Capgemini: Capgemini is a global services firm, so scope, tooling, response authority and transformation work should be specified precisely in the statement of work.; Public pages do not publish pricing, minimum terms, service credits, MTTD, MTTR or a contractual response SLA.. Watch for with Hitachi Cyber: Pricing is fully custom, no public benchmarks to anchor negotiation; OT coverage routes through the new Krakow SOC and may change response timing if your assets sit elsewhere.
Should I choose Capgemini or Hitachi Cyber?
Choose Capgemini if: large enterprises that want a global services partner for MDR plus SOC transformation. Choose Hitachi Cyber if: existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with. Capgemini is not ideal for sMBs seeking transparent per-endpoint MDR pricing. Hitachi Cyber is not ideal for buyers who need published SLA commitments or independently validated detection metrics.
Daylight Security
AI-native MDR for buyers comparing active remediation across endpoint, cloud, identity, and SaaS. Daylight works with existing EDR/SIEM stacks and uses ChatOps-native collaboration, so it can be a useful third reference point in this comparison.