Defendable vs OpenText
Defendable is a Services firm that works with your existing tools. OpenText is a Pure-play MDR that works with your existing tools. Defendable targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations; OpenText serves SMB and Mid-market. Defendable includes 1 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint), compared to 4 for OpenText (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Network).
Buyer brief
Defendable is a Services firm that works with your existing tools. OpenText is a Pure-play MDR that works with your existing tools. Defendable targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations; OpenText serves SMB and Mid-market. Defendable includes 1 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint), compared to 4 for OpenText (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Network).
Defendable (Services firm) and OpenText (Pure-play MDR) serve different buyer profiles. Your decision depends on whether you prioritize Defendable's defendable mdr fits nordic buyers that want norwegian soc monitoring, microsoft sentinel-friendly... or OpenText's sensible fit for smaller it teams that want opentext's threat intelligence and a 24/7 soc layered....
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Norwegian and Nordic buyers that want MDR operated from Oslo and Gjovik | SMB and lower mid-market organizations that want a SOC layer over their existing endpoint stack |
| Price | Custom quote | Custom quote |
| Response authority | 1/6 actions · Configurable | 1/6 actions · Approval required |
| 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
- SMB and lower mid-market organizations that want a SOC layer over their existing endpoint stack
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 1/6 actions · Approval required
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
Detailed comparison
| FIELD | DefendableTECH-AGNOSTIC | OpenTextTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| Fit | ||
| Target size | Mid-market, Enterprise | SMB, Mid-market |
| Sentiment | Mixed | Mixed |
| Your stack | ||
| Approach | Works with your tools | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | Microsoft Defender | CrowdStrikeSentinelOneSophosCarbon BlackBitdefender Microsoft Defender |
| SIEM integrations | Microsoft Sentinel | Splunk Microsoft Sentinel |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: LimitedIDIdentity: LimitedSaaSSaaS: LimitedNetNetwork: LimitedOTOT/IoT: Not covered | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: LimitedSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Not covered |
| Response | ||
| Response type | Active Remediation | Guided Response |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Approval Required |
| Response actions | Custom playbooks | Custom playbooks |
| IR included | Separate | Separate |
| 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 | ~ Limited |
| SaaS apps | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| Network | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| OT/ICS | Not offered | Not offered |
| 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, not published. Sold direct and through OpenText partner channel. |
| 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. | Co-managed model means the customer's team still does the actual containment work. No published SLA, contractual response commitments must be negotiated. Headline detection metrics come from a 2021 launch announcement and have not been independently verified |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Custom, Incident Response Retainer | Annual |
| Channels | PortalEmailPhone | EmailPortalPhone |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | – | – |
| SOC regions | Europe | North America |
| 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 | SMBHealthcareFinancial ServicesPublic Sector |
| MTTD | Not published | Less than 30 minutes (vendor-published, 2021 launch claim) |
| 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. | Public review coverage of OpenText Core MDR is thin. Capterra lists the product with zero reviews, and there is no Gartner Peer Insights MDR profile or G2 page with a meaningful review base. Practitioner discussion mostly references the broader OpenText Cybersecurity portfolio and the Webroot heritage rather than 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 | 1991 |
| 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 OpenText?
Defendable is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). OpenText is a Pure-play MDR that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Defendable covers 1 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 4 for OpenText.
How do Defendable and OpenText differ in response capabilities?
Defendable supports 1 autonomous actions (custom playbooks) and approval is configurable. OpenText supports 1 autonomous actions (custom playbooks) and requires approval before acting.
How does Defendable pricing compare to OpenText?
Defendable pricing: Not published. OpenText 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 OpenText: Co-managed model means the customer's team still does the actual containment work; No published SLA, contractual response commitments must be negotiated.
Should I choose Defendable or OpenText?
Choose Defendable if: norwegian and Nordic buyers that want MDR operated from Oslo and Gjovik. Choose OpenText if: sMB and lower mid-market organizations that want a SOC layer over their existing endpoint stack. Defendable is not ideal for buyers that need public MDR pricing or contractual SLA terms before sales. OpenText is not ideal for buyers who need analysts to isolate endpoints or kill processes without customer approval.
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.