Defendable vs Eviden
Defendable and Eviden are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Defendable targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations, while Eviden serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Defendable includes 1 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint), compared to 6 for Eviden (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS).
Buyer brief
Defendable and Eviden are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Defendable targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations, while Eviden serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Defendable includes 1 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint), compared to 6 for Eviden (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS).
Eviden offers broader coverage (6 surfaces vs. 1). Defendable may suit teams that need depth over breadth.
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Norwegian and Nordic buyers that want MDR operated from Oslo and Gjovik | European and Middle East enterprises wanting a regional services-firm MDR with deep on-the-ground presence |
| Price | Custom quote | Custom quote |
| Response authority | 1/6 actions · Configurable | 6/6 actions · Configurable |
| Stack | Works with existing stack | Works with existing stack |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Warranty | None listed | 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
- Best fit
- European and Middle East enterprises wanting a regional services-firm MDR with deep on-the-ground presence
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 6/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
Detailed comparison
| FIELD | DefendableTECH-AGNOSTIC | EvidenTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| Fit | ||
| Target size | Mid-market, Enterprise | Mid-market, Enterprise |
| Sentiment | Mixed | Mixed |
| Your stack | ||
| Approach | Works with your tools | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | Microsoft Defender | CrowdStrikeSentinelOneTrend Micro Microsoft Defender |
| SIEM integrations | Microsoft Sentinel | SplunkIBM QRadarGoogle Chronicle Microsoft Sentinel |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: LimitedIDIdentity: LimitedSaaSSaaS: LimitedNetNetwork: LimitedOTOT/IoT: Not covered | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Covered |
| Response | ||
| Response type | Active Remediation | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Configurable |
| Response actions | Custom playbooks | IsolateKill processContainDisable accountsQuarantineCustom playbooks |
| IR included | Separate | ✓ 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 | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| Identity | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| SaaS apps | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| Network | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| OT/ICS | Not offered | ✓ Included |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Custom quote. Defendable does not publish MDR package pricing. | Custom quote, negotiated with the regional team. Fully managed and co-managed tiers. Sold direct. |
| Hidden cost warnings | 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. | Pricing varies by region with no public benchmarks, expect long sales cycles. Atos Group is mid-restructuring under the Genesis plan, watch contract terms around continuity. AIsaac value depends on telemetry sitting in Amazon Security Lake or compatible data fabric, your data architecture choice changes pricing |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Custom, Incident Response Retainer | Annual, Multi-year |
| Channels | PortalEmailPhone | EmailPortalPhone |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | – | ✓ |
| SOC regions | Europe | EuropeNorth AmericaAsia-PacificMEA |
| Onboarding | Defendable publishes an MDR onboarding flow covering identification, planning, platform establishment and execution. It does not publish a standard onboarding duration. | Not published |
| Industry focus | Not published | Financial ServicesPublic SectorEnergyManufacturingDefenseHealthcare |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published |
| Community view | 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. | Eviden has a Gartner Peer Insights MDR vendor profile and analyst recognition but limited grassroots community coverage on Reddit and G2. Buyer perception is shaped more by Atos Group news (Genesis transformation plan, Tech Foundations sale, French State HPC offer) than by independent customer reviews of the MDR service itself. |
| Compliance | ISO 27001Norwegian National Security Authority Quality Scheme for Incident Response | Not published |
| Certifications | ISO 27001:2023Norwegian National Security Authority Quality Scheme for Incident ResponseEco-lighthouse certified | Not published |
| Founded | 2020 | 2023 |
| Data retention | 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. | Not published |
| API available | – | ✓ |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
FAQ
What is the main difference between Defendable and Eviden?
Defendable is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Eviden is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Defendable covers 1 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 6 for Eviden.
How do Defendable and Eviden differ in response capabilities?
Defendable supports 1 autonomous actions (custom playbooks) and approval is configurable. Eviden supports 6 autonomous actions (account disable, custom playbooks, endpoint isolation, file quarantine, network containment, process termination) and approval is configurable. Incident response is not included with Defendable and included with Eviden.
How does Defendable pricing compare to Eviden?
Defendable pricing: Not published. Eviden pricing: Not published. 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.. Watch for with Eviden: Pricing varies by region with no public benchmarks, expect long sales cycles; Atos Group is mid-restructuring under the Genesis plan, watch contract terms around continuity.
Should I choose Defendable or Eviden?
Choose Defendable if: norwegian and Nordic buyers that want MDR operated from Oslo and Gjovik. Choose Eviden if: european and Middle East enterprises wanting a regional services-firm MDR with deep on-the-ground presence. Defendable is not ideal for buyers that need public MDR pricing or contractual SLA terms before sales. Eviden is not ideal for sMB and lower mid-market buyers who need fast-onboarding pure-play MDR.
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.