eSentire vs ITC Secure
eSentire is a Pure-play MDR that works with your existing tools. ITC Secure is a Microsoft-ecosystem that works with your existing tools. eSentire targets SMB, Mid-market, and Enterprise organizations; ITC Secure serves Mid-market and Enterprise. eSentire includes 5 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network), compared to 3 for ITC Secure (Endpoint, SaaS, Identity).
Buyer brief
eSentire is a Pure-play MDR that works with your existing tools. ITC Secure is a Microsoft-ecosystem that works with your existing tools. eSentire targets SMB, Mid-market, and Enterprise organizations; ITC Secure serves Mid-market and Enterprise. eSentire includes 5 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network), compared to 3 for ITC Secure (Endpoint, SaaS, Identity).
eSentire (Pure-play MDR) and ITC Secure (Microsoft-ecosystem) serve different buyer profiles. Your decision depends on whether you prioritize eSentire's esentire excels at active, hands-on response and publicly reports 15-minute containment or ITC Secure's itc secure fits buyers that want microsoft-centered mxdr with pulse portal visibility, service re....
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Organizations wanting a provider that publicly reports 15-minute containment with true active remediation | Microsoft-centered buyers that want a verified managed XDR provider rather than a pure-play MDR platform |
| Price | Buyer benchmark: $30-100/endpoint/yr | Custom quote |
| Response authority | 6/6 actions · Configurable | 0/6 actions · Configurable |
| Stack | Works with existing stack | Works with existing stack |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Warranty | None listed | None listed |
- Best fit
- Organizations wanting a provider that publicly reports 15-minute containment with true active remediation
- Price
- Buyer benchmark: $30-100/endpoint/yr
- Response authority
- 6/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
- Best fit
- Microsoft-centered buyers that want a verified managed XDR provider rather than a pure-play MDR platform
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 0/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
Detailed comparison
| FIELD | eSentireTECH-AGNOSTIC | ITC SecureTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| Fit | ||
| Target size | SMB, Mid-market, Enterprise | Mid-market, Enterprise |
| Sentiment | Positive | Mixed |
| Your stack | ||
| Approach | Works with your tools | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | CrowdStrike FalconMicrosoft Defender for EndpointSentinelOneVMware Carbon BlackeSentire Atlas Agent (proprietary, optional) | Microsoft Defender |
| SIEM integrations | SplunkSumo Logic Microsoft Sentinel | Microsoft Sentinel |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Not covered | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: LimitedIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: LimitedOTOT/IoT: Limited |
| Response | ||
| Response type | Active Remediation | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Configurable |
| Response actions | IsolateKill processContainDisable accountsQuarantineCustom playbooks | Alert and notify only |
| IR included | ✓ Included | Separate |
| Cost | ||
| Price range | Third-party buyer data reports eSentire MDR endpoint-focused pricing around $60-100/endpoint/year for 50-200 endpoints, $40-80/endpoint/year for 200-1,000 endpoints, and $30-60/endpoint/year for 1,000+ endpoints. Older community reports cite $10-25/endpoint/month depending on tier. | Not published |
| Minimum seats | None | None |
| Breach warranty | – | – |
| More details | ||
| Requires own agent | No | No |
| Endpoints | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Cloud workloads | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| Identity | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| SaaS apps | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Network | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| OT/ICS | Not offered | ~ Limited |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Per-endpoint pricing across three tiers (Essentials up to 500 endpoints, Advanced up to 5,000, Complete up to 5,000) with BYOL or bundled Atlas Agent options | Custom quote. ITC Secure does not publish MXDR powered by Pulse package pricing. |
| Hidden cost warnings | Tier differences are significant. Essentials may lack key response and advisory capabilities available in Advanced/Complete.. BYOL pricing differs from bundled Atlas Agent pricing. Custom pricing for 5,000+ endpoints.. MSP program uses inflexible per-customer purchasing model (criticized by partners) | Public pages do not publish MXDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.. The service is Microsoft-centric, so Microsoft licensing, tenant readiness and log ingestion should be priced before comparison.. ITC Secure publishes broad MXDR components, including endpoint, identity, Office 365, cloud apps, storage, vulnerability management and OT. Buyers should confirm which components are included in their quote.. Public pages do not define default response authority, so containment permissions and approval rules should be written into the contract.. Incident response is listed as a separate service, so buyers should confirm what is included in MXDR versus a separate incident-response engagement. |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Annual, Multi-year | Custom, MXDR powered by Pulse, Managed services, Incident Response |
| Channels | TeamsEmailPortalPhone | PortalEmailPhone |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | ✓ | – |
| SOC regions | North AmericaEurope | |
| Onboarding | Average 14 days deployment | Not published. ITC Secure publishes security engineering and SOC onboarding as a build-and-deploy service, but no standard MXDR implementation duration was found. |
| Industry focus | Financial ServicesHealthcareManufacturingTechnologyGovernment | Not published |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published |
| MTTR | 15-minute Mean Time to Contain (vendor-published public metric). 99.3% of threats isolated at first host (vendor-published). 200+ new threat protections added daily. | Not published |
| Community view | G2 4.6/5 (272 reviews). Gartner Peer Insights 4.6/5 (83 reviews). PeerSpot 7.6/10. Forrester Wave Leader (Europe Q3 2025). Praised for public 15-minute containment metrics and true active remediation. Some price sensitivity for SMBs and occasional SOC response delays on non-emergency tickets. | No meaningful MDR-specific buyer-review signal was found in major English-language review communities during this pass. The public buyer case rests on ITC Secure's Microsoft focus, Microsoft Verified Managed XDR status, Pulse portal, long managed-service history and broad MXDR service components. Buyers should validate pricing, response authority, SOC operating model and exact component inclusion directly. |
| Compliance | ISO 27001PCI-DSSSOC 2 Type IIHIPAA/HITRUSTGDPRNIST | ISO 27001Cyber Essentials PlusISO/IEC 20000-1 |
| Certifications | ISO 15408UK Cyber EssentialsSIG LiteAITECMicrosoft Security Solutions PartnerAWS Partner Network | Microsoft Verified Managed XDRMicrosoft Solutions Partner in SecurityMicrosoft Solutions Partner in Modern WorkMicrosoft Solutions Partner in Infrastructure AzureMicrosoft Intelligent Security AssociationCyber Essentials PlusISO/IEC 20000-1ISO/IEC 27001Great Place to Work Certification |
| Founded | 2001 | – |
| Data retention | Not publicly disclosed | Not published. ITC Secure says Pulse provides visibility into customer security posture, activities, incident trends, Microsoft license consumption and service metrics. No standard public MXDR log-retention period or data-residency term was found. |
| API available | ✓ | – |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
FAQ
What is the main difference between eSentire and ITC Secure?
eSentire is a Pure-play MDR that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). ITC Secure is a Microsoft-ecosystem that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). eSentire covers 5 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 3 for ITC Secure.
How do eSentire and ITC Secure differ in response capabilities?
eSentire supports 6 autonomous actions (account disable, custom playbooks, endpoint isolation, file quarantine, network containment, process termination) and approval is configurable. ITC Secure supports 0 autonomous actions (none) and approval is configurable. Incident response is included with eSentire and not included with ITC Secure.
How does eSentire pricing compare to ITC Secure?
eSentire pricing: Third-party buyer data reports eSentire MDR endpoint-focused pricing around $60-100/endpoint/year for 50-200 endpoints, $40-80/endpoint/year for 200-1,000 endpoints, and $30-60/endpoint/year for 1,000+ endpoints. Older community reports cite $10-25/endpoint/month depending on tier.. ITC Secure pricing: Not published. Watch for with eSentire: Tier differences are significant. Essentials may lack key response and advisory capabilities available in Advanced/Complete.; BYOL pricing differs from bundled Atlas Agent pricing. Custom pricing for 5,000+ endpoints.. Watch for with ITC Secure: Public pages do not publish MXDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.; The service is Microsoft-centric, so Microsoft licensing, tenant readiness and log ingestion should be priced before comparison..
Should I choose eSentire or ITC Secure?
Choose eSentire if: organizations wanting a provider that publicly reports 15-minute containment with true active remediation. Choose ITC Secure if: microsoft-centered buyers that want a verified managed XDR provider rather than a pure-play MDR platform. eSentire is not ideal for budget-constrained SMBs seeking the lowest-cost MDR option. ITC Secure is not ideal for buyers that need public MDR pricing 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.