ThreatDown vs Truesec
ThreatDown is a Platform vendor that requires its own security platform. Truesec is a Services firm that works with your existing tools. ThreatDown targets SMB and Mid-market organizations; Truesec serves Mid-market and Enterprise. ThreatDown includes 1 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint), compared to 5 for Truesec (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network).
Buyer brief
ThreatDown is a Platform vendor that requires its own security platform. Truesec is a Services firm that works with your existing tools. ThreatDown targets SMB and Mid-market organizations; Truesec serves Mid-market and Enterprise. ThreatDown includes 1 attack surfaces in base pricing (Endpoint), compared to 5 for Truesec (Endpoint, Cloud, SaaS, Identity, Network).
ThreatDown is the choice if you want a single-vendor stack with deep integration. Truesec is better if you have existing tools and want flexibility.
At a glance
| FIELD |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | SMBs and IT-constrained organizations wanting affordable MDR with published pricing | Nordic enterprises wanting the largest regional SOC with local language support |
| Price | $99/endpoint/yr | Not published |
| Response authority | 3/6 actions · Configurable | 5/6 actions · Configurable |
| Stack | Requires own platform | Works with existing stack |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Warranty | None listed | None listed |
- Best fit
- SMBs and IT-constrained organizations wanting affordable MDR with published pricing
- Price
- $99/endpoint/yr
- Response authority
- 3/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Requires own platform
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
- Best fit
- Nordic enterprises wanting the largest regional SOC with local language support
- Price
- Not published
- Response authority
- 5/6 actions · Configurable
- Stack
- Works with existing stack
- Data access
- Dashboards
- Warranty
- None listed
›› Detailed comparison
| FIELD | ThreatDownPLATFORM | TruesecTECH-AGNOSTIC |
|---|---|---|
| ›› Fit | ||
| Target size | SMB, Mid-market | Mid-market, Enterprise |
| Sentiment | Positive | Mixed |
| ›› Your stack | ||
| Approach | Requires their platform | Works with your tools |
| EDR integrations | ThreatDown EDR (native, required) | Microsoft DefenderCrowdStrikeSentinelOnePalo Alto Cortex |
| SIEM integrations | Splunk Enterprise (log export)Microsoft Sentinel (log export)Google Chronicle (log export) | Microsoft SentinelCrowdStrike Falcon LogScaleSplunk |
| Coverage | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: Not coveredIDIdentity: Not coveredSaaSSaaS: Not coveredNetNetwork: Not coveredOTOT/IoT: Not covered | EPEndpoint: CoveredCloudCloud: CoveredIDIdentity: CoveredSaaSSaaS: CoveredNetNetwork: CoveredOTOT/IoT: Optional add-on |
| ›› Response | ||
| Response type | Active Remediation | Active Remediation |
| Approval policy | Configurable | Configurable |
| Response actions | IsolateKill processQuarantine | IsolateKill processContainQuarantineCustom playbooks |
| IR included | Separate | Separate |
| ›› Cost | ||
| Price range | MDR at $99/endpoint/year (Elite) or $119/endpoint/year (Ultimate). Server: $129-179/year. Mobile: $10/device. | Not published |
| Minimum seats | 5 | None |
| Breach warranty | – | – |
| ›› More details | ||
| Requires own agent | Yes | No |
| Endpoints | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Cloud workloads | Not offered | ✓ Included |
| Identity | Not offered | ✓ Included |
| SaaS apps | Not offered | ✓ Included |
| Network | Not offered | ✓ Included |
| OT/ICS | Not offered | + Optional |
| Threat hunting | ✓ Included | ✓ Included |
| Response SLA | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| 24/7 coverage | ✓ | ✓ |
| Pricing model | Per-endpoint, published pricing. Four bundles: Core ($69), Advanced ($79), Elite ($99, includes MDR), Ultimate ($119, MDR+DNS+Premium). Server: $129-179/year. Mobile: $10/device. 5-endpoint minimum. 10% discount for 2-year commitment. | Fixed fee per endpoint. No log volume or retention surcharges. No public pricing for any tier. |
| Hidden cost warnings | Endpoint-only coverage, no cloud workload, SaaS, identity, or network monitoring. Platform-native lock-in, cannot BYO CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, or Defender. No dedicated analyst or account manager, pooled SOC model | No public pricing for any tier, requires sales engagement for any estimate. IR is a separate retainer on Core and Enterprise, only Black includes it. US customers may get a different experience since bulk of 350+ specialists are in Europe |
| Data portability | Limited | Partial |
| Contract terms | Annual, 2-year (10% discount) | Annual, Multi-year |
| Channels | SlackTeamsPortalEmailPhone | PortalEmailPhoneTeamsSlack |
| Data access | Dashboards | Dashboards |
| Dedicated analyst | – | ✓ |
| SOC regions | North America | EuropeNorth America |
| Onboarding | Minutes after agent deployment | 72 hours for Core and Enterprise. Black tier not disclosed. |
| Industry focus | EducationGovernmentHealthcareManufacturingMSP/Channel | Financial ServicesGovernmentHealthcareEnergyCritical Infrastructure |
| MTTD | Not published | Not published |
| MTTR | Not published | Not published |
| Community view | G2 4.6/5 (1,074 reviews) with multiple Leader awards (Best ROI, Easiest to Use). Gartner Peer Insights 4.6/5 (904 reviews) for EDR, though MDR-specific reviews are fewer. MRG Effitas EPP Product of the Year 2025. IDC MarketScape 2024: Leader for endpoint security (Small Business). Praised for simplicity and price transparency. Main knock: endpoint-only with platform lock-in. | Effectively unrateable. No public reviews on G2, PeerSpot, or Gartner Peer Insights. Not in Forrester Wave or Gartner MQ for MDR. No Reddit mentions. Strong Nordic reputation based on vendor claims and partner references (EY, Microsoft MISA), but impossible to validate through independent peer feedback. |
| Compliance | SOC 2 Type IIISO 27001 | ISO 27001ISO 9001ISO 14001MISA (Microsoft Intelligent Security Association) |
| Certifications | SOC 2 Type IIISO 27001 | ISO 27001ISO 9001ISO 14001 |
| Founded | 2008 | 2005 |
| Data retention | Not publicly disclosed | Included in fixed fee, no log volume or retention surcharges. Specific retention periods not disclosed. |
| API available | ✓ | ✓ |
| Website | Visit → | Visit → |
›› FAQ
What is the main difference between ThreatDown and Truesec?
ThreatDown is a Platform vendor that is platform-native (requires their own security stack). Truesec is a Services firm that is technology-agnostic (works with your existing tools). ThreatDown covers 1 attack surfaces in base pricing vs. 5 for Truesec.
How do ThreatDown and Truesec differ in response capabilities?
ThreatDown supports 3 autonomous actions (endpoint isolation, file quarantine, process termination) and approval is configurable. Truesec supports 5 autonomous actions (custom playbooks, endpoint isolation, file quarantine, network containment, process termination) and approval is configurable.
How does ThreatDown pricing compare to Truesec?
ThreatDown pricing: MDR at $99/endpoint/year (Elite) or $119/endpoint/year (Ultimate). Server: $129-179/year. Mobile: $10/device. (5-seat minimum). Truesec pricing: Custom-quoted pricing. Watch for with ThreatDown: Endpoint-only coverage, no cloud workload, SaaS, identity, or network monitoring; Platform-native lock-in, cannot BYO CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, or Defender. Watch for with Truesec: No public pricing for any tier, requires sales engagement for any estimate; IR is a separate retainer on Core and Enterprise, only Black includes it.
Should I choose ThreatDown or Truesec?
Choose ThreatDown if: sMBs and IT-constrained organizations wanting affordable MDR with published pricing. Choose Truesec if: nordic enterprises wanting the largest regional SOC with local language support. ThreatDown is not ideal for enterprise organizations needing multi-surface coverage (cloud, SaaS, identity, network). Truesec is not ideal for uS-based organizations wanting a fully staffed local SOC (bulk of specialists in Europe).
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.