e2e-assure vs Wirespeed
e2e-assure is a Pure-play MDR that works with your existing tools. Wirespeed is a Cyber insurer that works with your existing tools. e2e-assure targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations; Wirespeed serves SMB, Mid-market, and Enterprise.
Buyer brief
e2e-assure is a Pure-play MDR that works with your existing tools. Wirespeed is a Cyber insurer that works with your existing tools. e2e-assure targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations; Wirespeed serves SMB, Mid-market, and Enterprise.
e2e-assure (Pure-play MDR) and Wirespeed (Cyber insurer) serve different buyer profiles. Your decision depends on whether you prioritize e2e-assure's uk-focused mdr with sc-cleared analysts and deep microsoft expertise, purpose-built for critical ... or Wirespeed's wirespeed is most interesting as an automated mdr layer for msps, lean security teams and coaliti....
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | UK or Australian government and critical infrastructure organizations requiring SC-cleared analysts | MSPs and MSSPs that want to add or scale MDR without hiring a large analyst team |
| Price | AppSource from GBP 6/user/mo; min spend unclear | Custom quote |
| Response authority | 4/6 actions · Configurable | 3/6 actions · Configurable |
| Stack | Works with existing stack | Works with existing stack |
| Data access | Dashboards | Full query access |
| Warranty | None listed | None listed |
- Best fit
- UK or Australian government and critical infrastructure organizations requiring SC-cleared analysts
- Price
- AppSource from GBP 6/user/mo; min spend unclear
- Response authority
- 4/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
- Best fit
- MSPs and MSSPs that want to add or scale MDR without hiring a large analyst team
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 3/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Full query access
- Warranty
- None listed
›› Detailed comparison
| FIELD | e2e-assureTECH-AGNOSTIC | WirespeedTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| ›› Fit | ||
| Target size | Mid-market, Enterprise | SMB, Mid-market, Enterprise |
| Sentiment | Positive | Mixed |
| ›› Your stack | ||
| Approach | Works with your tools | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | CrowdStrikeTrend Micro Vision One Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne | CrowdStrike FalconPalo Alto Networks CortexJamf ProtectCheck Point HarmonyHalcyon Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne |
| SIEM integrations | Splunk Microsoft Sentinel | Generic Syslog LogsGeneric JSON Logs Microsoft Sentinel |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: Optional add-onIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Optional add-on | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: LimitedOTOT/IoT: Not covered |
| ›› Response | ||
| Response type | Guided Response | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Configurable |
| Response actions | IsolateDisable accountsQuarantineCustom playbooks | IsolateDisable accountsCustom playbooks |
| IR included | Separate | Separate |
| ›› Cost | ||
| Price range | Starting around £6/user/month (per Microsoft AppSource listing), dependent on user count, number of services, and subject to minimum spend. Specific minimums not published. | Custom pricing. No public per-user, per-endpoint or platform price found. |
| Minimum seats | None | None |
| Breach warranty | – | – |
| ›› More details | ||
| Requires own agent | No | No |
| Endpoints | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Cloud workloads | + Optional | ✓ Included |
| Identity | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| SaaS apps | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Network | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| OT/ICS | + Optional | Not offered |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | Extra cost |
| Response SLA | ≤1 hour | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Per-user per-month pricing. Two tiers: Monitored (baseline Defender coverage, monthly reports) and Managed (extended functionality, automated threat responses, Teams-based monthly reviews). Contracts typically 12-36 months. Also available as committed annual contract with retrospective monthly management charge based on device count. | Custom pricing. Pricing page says Wirespeed works out pricing by organization and offers direct pricing for enterprises, partner pricing for MSP/MSSPs, and reseller/channel programs. |
| Hidden cost warnings | Incident response is NOT included in base MDR. It is a separate retainer delivered through UK-based partners.. Automated containment triggers on critical alerts, but broader remediation is your team's responsibility. Budget for internal staff to act on SOC guidance.. Minimum spend threshold exists but is not publicly disclosed. Ask for it before engaging.. OT/ICS and advanced cloud coverage may be priced as additional modules beyond base MDR.. Managed tier costs more than Monitored, with significantly different automation and analyst involvement. Clarify which tier is being quoted. | The strongest strategic story is Coalition Active Insurance plus automated MDR, but Wirespeed's standalone-versus-Coalition-bundled commercial model should be confirmed.. No public fixed price bands or minimums were found.. No public contractual response SLA or service-credit table was found.. Auto-containment is opt-in and is skipped for beta integrations, so buyers must confirm which integrations support automatic action.. This is an automation-heavy MDR model. Buyers expecting named SOC analysts or human-led threat hunting should validate service scope carefully. |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Annual, 2-year, 3-year | Custom |
| Channels | TeamsEmailPortalPhone | SlackTeamsEmailPortal |
| Data access | Dashboards | Full query access |
| Dedicated analyst | – | – |
| SOC regions | EuropeAsia-Pacific | North America |
| Onboarding | Weeks, varies by integration complexity and environment scope | Not published as a standard timeline. Documentation says customers connect a user directory, detection source, communication channel and containment settings through API/OAuth integrations. |
| Industry focus | GovernmentCritical National InfrastructureManufacturingDefenseUtilitiesLife Sciences | Cyber InsuranceManaged Service ProvidersTechnologyProfessional ServicesFinancial ServicesHealthcare |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published as MTTD. Coalition reports median time to verdict of 1,801 milliseconds. |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published as MTTR. Wirespeed says containment can happen in seconds when configured and supported by the integration. |
| Community view | NPS score of 88+ (vendor-reported, industry average 34) suggests high customer satisfaction among existing clients. However, virtually no public reviews on G2, Gartner, or Reddit exist, making independent validation impossible. Customers appear to value SC clearance and UK/government compliance focus. Small enough provider that community discussion is minimal. | Wirespeed is very new, so independent MDR review data is thin. Public differentiation is strong: automation-first MDR, broad integrations, MSP/MSSP positioning and Coalition's Active Insurance acquisition. The trade-off is limited third-party validation and open questions about post-acquisition packaging. |
| Compliance | ISO/IEC 27001Cyber Essentials PlusG-Cloud 14CCS Framework | SOC 2CMMC Level 2 support statement |
| Certifications | ISO/IEC 27001Cyber Essentials Plus | SOC 2 report available via Wirespeed Trust CenterSOC 2 attestation; CMMC support letter says Type I, while current site/trust materials should be checked for Type II status |
| Founded | 2013 | 2024 |
| Data retention | Not published | Pricing page lists 90 days of data lake retention. Long-term retention, export and Coalition data-sharing boundaries should be confirmed in contract. |
| API available | ✓ | ✓ |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
›› FAQ
What is the main difference between e2e-assure and Wirespeed?
e2e-assure is a Pure-play MDR that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Wirespeed is a Cyber insurer that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). SLA commitments differ: e2e-assure offers ≤1 hour, Wirespeed offers Not disclosed.
How do e2e-assure and Wirespeed differ in response capabilities?
e2e-assure supports 4 autonomous actions (account disable, custom playbooks, endpoint isolation, file quarantine) and approval is configurable. Wirespeed supports 3 autonomous actions (account disable, custom playbooks, endpoint isolation) and approval is configurable.
How does e2e-assure pricing compare to Wirespeed?
e2e-assure pricing: Starting around £6/user/month (per Microsoft AppSource listing), dependent on user count, number of services, and subject to minimum spend. Specific minimums not published.. Wirespeed pricing: Custom pricing. No public per-user, per-endpoint or platform price found.. Watch for with e2e-assure: Incident response is NOT included in base MDR. It is a separate retainer delivered through UK-based partners.; Automated containment triggers on critical alerts, but broader remediation is your team's responsibility. Budget for internal staff to act on SOC guidance.. Watch for with Wirespeed: The strongest strategic story is Coalition Active Insurance plus automated MDR, but Wirespeed's standalone-versus-Coalition-bundled commercial model should be confirmed.; No public fixed price bands or minimums were found..
Should I choose e2e-assure or Wirespeed?
Choose e2e-assure if: uK or Australian government and critical infrastructure organizations requiring SC-cleared analysts. Choose Wirespeed if: mSPs and MSSPs that want to add or scale MDR without hiring a large analyst team. e2e-assure is not ideal for organizations needing full hands-on remediation (e2e-assure automates containment but guides remediation). Wirespeed is not ideal for buyers that require named analysts, scheduled threat hunts and human-led SOC review for every case.
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.