Hitachi Cyber vs Performanta
Hitachi Cyber and Performanta are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Hitachi Cyber targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations, while Performanta serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Hitachi Cyber includes 6 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS), compared to 2 for Performanta (Endpoint, Identity).
Buyer brief
Hitachi Cyber and Performanta are both Services firms that work with your existing tools. Hitachi Cyber targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations, while Performanta serves Mid-market and Enterprise. Hitachi Cyber includes 6 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network, OT/ICS), compared to 2 for Performanta (Endpoint, Identity).
Hitachi Cyber offers broader coverage (6 surfaces vs. 2). Performanta may suit teams that need depth over breadth.
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with | Buyers already committed to Microsoft Defender and Sentinel that want a services firm to manage detection and response |
| Price | Custom quote | Custom quote |
| Response authority | 6/6 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
- Existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 6/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
- Best fit
- Buyers already committed to Microsoft Defender and Sentinel that want a services firm to manage detection and response
- Price
- Custom quote
- Response authority
- 1/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
Detailed comparison
| FIELD | Hitachi CyberTECH-AGNOSTIC | PerformantaTECH-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 | CrowdStrikeSentinelOne Microsoft Defender | Microsoft Defender |
| SIEM integrations | SplunkGoogle Chronicle Microsoft Sentinel | Microsoft Sentinel |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Covered | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: LimitedIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: LimitedNetNetwork: LimitedOTOT/IoT: Not covered |
| Response | ||
| Response type | Active Remediation | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Configurable |
| Response actions | IsolateKill processContainDisable accountsQuarantineCustom playbooks | Custom playbooks |
| IR included | ✓ Included | 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 | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| Identity | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| SaaS apps | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| Network | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| OT/ICS | ✓ Included | Not offered |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Custom quote, not published. Sold direct. | Custom quote. Performanta does not publish MDR, Safe XDR or managed SOC package pricing. |
| Hidden cost warnings | Pricing is fully custom, no public benchmarks to anchor negotiation. OT coverage routes through the new Krakow SOC and may change response timing if your assets sit elsewhere. Services span MDR, MSS and consulting under one roof, scope creep into adjacent services is easy | Public pages do not publish MDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.. The explicit MDR offer is tied to Defender for Endpoint, so Microsoft licensing and customer tenant readiness can drive total cost.. Public pages do not define default MDR response authority, so buyers need the managed-technology boundary in writing.. Cloud and SaaS coverage appear tied to Microsoft security controls and Safe XDR scope, so non-Microsoft telemetry should be confirmed early.. Incident response is listed as a consulting service, so buyers should confirm what is included in MDR versus a separate incident-response engagement. |
| Data portability | Partial | Partial |
| Contract terms | Annual, Multi-year | Custom, Managed SOC, Safe XDR, MDR for Defender for Endpoint |
| Channels | EmailPortalPhone | PortalEmailPhone |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | ✓ | – |
| SOC regions | North AmericaEuropeAsia-Pacific | EuropeAfrica |
| Onboarding | Not published | Not published. Performanta describes scoping, discovery, prioritisation, validation and mobilisation stages for Safe XDR, but no standard implementation duration was found. |
| Industry focus | Financial ServicesEnergyManufacturingTransportationHealthcarePublic Sector | Financial ServicesEducationHealthcareGovernmentRetailProfessional ServicesAgricultureTelecommunicationsManufacturingTransportationTourism |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published |
| Community view | Hitachi Cyber has limited public review presence on G2, Gartner Peer Insights and PeerSpot for its MDR service specifically. Most independent coverage focuses on the Hitachi corporate parent or Above Security heritage rather than current customer experience. Buyers will need to lean on direct references. | No meaningful MDR-specific buyer-review signal was found in major English-language review communities during this pass. The public buyer case rests on Performanta's Microsoft security focus, UK and South Africa SOC operations, Safe XDR platform, threat-hunting process and incident-response consulting depth. Buyers should validate pricing, response authority, non-Microsoft telemetry support and exact incident-response inclusion directly. |
| Compliance | ISO 9001 (MSS)PCI QSA (Canada, US, LATAM, Caribbean)FIRST member | – |
| Certifications | ISO 9001PCI QSAFIRST | – |
| Founded | 1999 | 2010 |
| Data retention | Not published | Not published. Performanta says it monitors customer environments and SIEM platforms, but no standard public MDR log-retention period or data-residency term was found. |
| API available | ✓ | – |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
FAQ
What is the main difference between Hitachi Cyber and Performanta?
Hitachi Cyber is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Performanta is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). Hitachi Cyber covers 6 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 2 for Performanta.
How do Hitachi Cyber and Performanta differ in response capabilities?
Hitachi Cyber supports 6 autonomous actions (account disable, custom playbooks, endpoint isolation, file quarantine, network containment, process termination) and approval is configurable. Performanta supports 1 autonomous actions (custom playbooks) and approval is configurable. Incident response is included with Hitachi Cyber and not included with Performanta.
How does Hitachi Cyber pricing compare to Performanta?
Hitachi Cyber pricing: Not published. Performanta pricing: Not published. Watch for with Hitachi Cyber: Pricing is fully custom, no public benchmarks to anchor negotiation; OT coverage routes through the new Krakow SOC and may change response timing if your assets sit elsewhere. Watch for with Performanta: Public pages do not publish MDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.; The explicit MDR offer is tied to Defender for Endpoint, so Microsoft licensing and customer tenant readiness can drive total cost..
Should I choose Hitachi Cyber or Performanta?
Choose Hitachi Cyber if: existing Hitachi enterprise customers consolidating security services with a vendor they already work with. Choose Performanta if: buyers already committed to Microsoft Defender and Sentinel that want a services firm to manage detection and response. Hitachi Cyber is not ideal for buyers who need published SLA commitments or independently validated detection metrics. Performanta 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.