InfoGuard vs OpenText
InfoGuard is a Services firm that works with your existing tools. OpenText is a Pure-play MDR that works with your existing tools. InfoGuard targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations; OpenText serves SMB and Mid-market.
Buyer brief
InfoGuard is a Services firm that works with your existing tools. OpenText is a Pure-play MDR that works with your existing tools. InfoGuard targets Mid-market and Enterprise organizations; OpenText serves SMB and Mid-market.
InfoGuard (Services firm) and OpenText (Pure-play MDR) serve different buyer profiles. Your decision depends on whether you prioritize InfoGuard's infoguard fits dach buyers that want a swiss services firm to run mdr, co-managed soc and csirt-b... 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 | Swiss, German and Austrian buyers that want MDR from DACH-based SOCs | 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
- Swiss, German and Austrian buyers that want MDR from DACH-based SOCs
- 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 | InfoGuardTECH-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 | Customer endpoint telemetry | CrowdStrikeMicrosoft DefenderSentinelOneSophosCarbon BlackBitdefender |
| SIEM integrations | Customer log sources | Microsoft SentinelSplunk |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: LimitedNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Limited | 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 | ✓ 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 | ✓ Included |
| Identity | ✓ Included | ~ Limited |
| SaaS apps | ~ Limited | ✓ Included |
| Network | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| OT/ICS | ~ Limited | Not offered |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Custom quote. InfoGuard 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.. Named autonomous response actions are not published, so response authority should be written into the contract.. InfoGuard offers both Managed SOC and Co-Managed SOC, so buyer-side staffing and responsibility can vary by model.. Data can stay at the customer premises or in Swiss data centres, which may change architecture and retention cost.. Incident Response Retainer exists as a separate offer, so buyers should confirm exactly what incident-response work is included in MDR. | 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, Managed SOC, Co-Managed SOC, Incident Response Retainer | Annual |
| Channels | PortalEmailPhone | EmailPortalPhone |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | – | – |
| SOC regions | Europe | North America |
| Onboarding | InfoGuard's Cyber Defence brochure states 4 weeks for structured SOC onboarding. Buyers should confirm which log sources, sensors and response playbooks are included in that onboarding scope. | Not published |
| Industry focus | Financial ServicesInsuranceManufacturingEnergyHealthcareRetailService ProvidersPublic Sector | SMBHealthcareFinancial ServicesPublic Sector |
| MTTD | Not published | Less than 30 minutes (vendor-published, 2021 launch claim) |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published |
| Community view | No meaningful MDR-specific buyer-review signal was found in major English-language review communities during this pass. The public buyer case rests on InfoGuard's Swiss and German SOC delivery, 90+ SOC and CSIRT experts, open XDR platform, data-residency options and incident-response credentials. Buyers should validate pricing, response authority, named integrations and exact co-managed responsibilities 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 27001ISAE 3000 Type 2GDPRSwiss DSG | Not published |
| Certifications | ISO/IEC 27001:2022ISO 14001ISAE 3000 Type 2-audited Cyber Defence CenterBSI-qualified APT Response service providerFIRST member | Not published |
| Founded | 2001 | 1991 |
| Data retention | InfoGuard says data is stored exclusively at the customer's premises or in its redundant data centres in Switzerland. No standard public MDR retention period was found. | Not published |
| API available | – | ✓ |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
FAQ
What is the main difference between InfoGuard and OpenText?
InfoGuard 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).
How do InfoGuard and OpenText differ in response capabilities?
InfoGuard supports 1 autonomous actions (custom playbooks) and approval is configurable. OpenText supports 1 autonomous actions (custom playbooks) and requires approval before acting. Incident response is included with InfoGuard and not included with OpenText.
How does InfoGuard pricing compare to OpenText?
InfoGuard pricing: Not published. OpenText pricing: Not published. Watch for with InfoGuard: Public pages do not publish MDR pricing, contract minimums or service-credit language.; Named autonomous response actions are not published, so response authority should be written into the contract.. 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 InfoGuard or OpenText?
Choose InfoGuard if: swiss, German and Austrian buyers that want MDR from DACH-based SOCs. Choose OpenText if: sMB and lower mid-market organizations that want a SOC layer over their existing endpoint stack. InfoGuard is not ideal for buyers that need public MDR pricing 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.