Cyberleaf vs Defendable
Cyberleaf and Defendable are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Cyberleaf targets SMB and Mid-market organizations, while Defendable serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Cyberleaf includes 5 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network), compared to 1 for Defendable (Endpoint).
Buyer brief
Cyberleaf and Defendable are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Cyberleaf targets SMB and Mid-market organizations, while Defendable serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Cyberleaf includes 5 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network), compared to 1 for Defendable (Endpoint).
Cyberleaf offers broader coverage (5 surfaces vs. 1). Defendable may suit teams that need depth over breadth.
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Growing businesses with 50-500 employees that have IT staff but no internal SOC | Norwegian and Nordic buyers that want MDR operated from Oslo and Gjovik |
| Price | Custom quote | Custom quote |
| Response authority | 2/6 actions · Configurable | 1/6 actions · Configurable |
| Stack | Works with existing stack | Works with existing stack |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Warranty | None listed | None listed |
- Best fit
- Growing businesses with 50-500 employees that have IT staff but no internal SOC
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 2/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
- Best fit
- Norwegian and Nordic buyers that want MDR operated from Oslo and Gjovik
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 1/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
Detailed comparison
| FIELD | CyberleafTECH-AGNOSTIC | DefendableTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| Fit | ||
| Target size | SMB, Mid-market | Mid-market, Enterprise |
| Sentiment | Mixed | Mixed |
| Your stack | ||
| Approach | Works with your tools | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | None listed | Microsoft Defender |
| SIEM integrations | None listed | Microsoft Sentinel |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Not covered | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: LimitedIDIdentity: LimitedSaaSSaaS: LimitedNetNetwork: LimitedOTOT/IoT: Not covered |
| Response | ||
| Response type | Active Remediation | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Configurable |
| Response actions | IsolateCustom playbooks | Custom playbooks |
| IR included | Separate | Separate |
| Cost | ||
| Price range | Custom quote. No public per-endpoint, per-user or package price found. | Not published |
| Minimum seats | None | None |
| Breach warranty | – | – |
| More details | ||
| Requires own agent | No | No |
| Endpoints | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Cloud workloads | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| Identity | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| SaaS apps | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| Network | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| OT/ICS | Not offered | Not offered |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Custom monthly pricing based on environment size and service needs. MSP partner pricing is described as predictable per-client pricing. | Custom quote. Defendable does not publish MDR package pricing. |
| Hidden cost warnings | The website says managed cybersecurity includes proactive services, while the public service agreement excludes some advanced work unless separately contracted.. No public MDR-specific SLA table was found.. The public agreement references annual, 24-month and 36-month terms, with renewal terms and add-on ordering handled through the sales order.. Remote access, collectors, virtual machines or servers may be required to deliver service, and some access methods can add charges. | Public pages do not publish MDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.. Response authority should be defined in writing because named autonomous endpoint and identity actions are not published.. Log storage can sit in the customer's Microsoft Log Analytics tenant or Defendable's platform, so retention and storage costs should be modeled early.. Incident-response retainer SLA is separate language and should not be assumed to be the MDR SLA.. Threat hunting is public, but hunt cadence and staffing are not published. |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Annual, 24 months, 36 months, Custom | Custom, Incident Response Retainer |
| Channels | PortalEmailPhone | PortalEmailPhone |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | – | – |
| SOC regions | North America | Europe |
| Onboarding | Most deployments are described as fully operational within weeks. Exact timeline depends on the customer environment and sales order. | Defendable publishes an MDR onboarding flow covering identification, planning, platform establishment and execution. It does not publish a standard onboarding duration. |
| Industry focus | Defense Industrial BaseHealthcareFinancial ServicesTechnologySaaSPrivate EquityGovernment Contractors | Not published |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published |
| Community view | Cyberleaf has a clear current vendor story, public customer language and partner positioning, but little independent MDR review volume was found in this pass. The strongest evidence is vendor-controlled, so buyer validation should lean on references, a proof of value and careful review of the sales order. | Defendable has limited MDR-specific public review volume in major English-language review communities. The public buyer case rests on Norwegian SOC delivery, a direct MDR page, Microsoft Sentinel support, proactive threat hunting, a customer portal and incident-response depth. Buyers should validate pricing, response authority, retention cost and contractual SLA terms directly. |
| Compliance | SOC 2CMMCNIST 800-171HIPAAPCI DSSISO 27001ITAR | ISO 27001Norwegian National Security Authority Quality Scheme for Incident Response |
| Certifications | SOC 2 Type IICyberAB Registered Practitioner Organization | ISO 27001:2023Norwegian National Security Authority Quality Scheme for Incident ResponseEco-lighthouse certified |
| Founded | 2010 | 2020 |
| Data retention | Not published. Cyberleaf says it indemnifies customers from license and data ingestion costs, but retention period and export terms were not found. | Defendable says customers can store additional log data in their own Microsoft Log Analytics tenant or in Defendable's log management platform. It does not publish standard MDR retention periods. |
| API available | – | – |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
FAQ
What is the main difference between Cyberleaf and Defendable?
Cyberleaf is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Defendable is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Cyberleaf covers 5 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 1 for Defendable.
How do Cyberleaf and Defendable differ in response capabilities?
Cyberleaf supports 2 autonomous actions (custom playbooks, endpoint isolation) and approval is configurable. Defendable supports 1 autonomous actions (custom playbooks) and approval is configurable.
How does Cyberleaf pricing compare to Defendable?
Cyberleaf pricing: Custom quote. No public per-endpoint, per-user or package price found.. Defendable pricing: Not published. Watch for with Cyberleaf: The website says managed cybersecurity includes proactive services, while the public service agreement excludes some advanced work unless separately contracted.; No public MDR-specific SLA table was found.. Watch for with Defendable: Public pages do not publish MDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.; Response authority should be defined in writing because named autonomous endpoint and identity actions are not published..
Should I choose Cyberleaf or Defendable?
Choose Cyberleaf if: growing businesses with 50-500 employees that have IT staff but no internal SOC. Choose Defendable if: norwegian and Nordic buyers that want MDR operated from Oslo and Gjovik. Cyberleaf is not ideal for buyers requiring public pricing before engaging sales. Defendable is not ideal for buyers that need public MDR pricing or contractual SLA terms before sales.
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.