Huntress Alternatives for MSPs: 8 Compared with Real Pricing

MSPs leave Huntress, Blackpoint Cyber and Arctic Wolf for a short list of predictable reasons: coverage that stops at the endpoint, per-seat economics that stop working at scale, and minimums that punish client churn. This compares eight alternatives on published prices, named weaknesses and what a migration actually costs you in time. If your clients are Microsoft-heavy and you need a rate you can quote against today, CyberQuell is the strongest fit; if you want proven endpoint and identity depth at a price you can check without a call, Huntress stays hard to beat; if you need autonomous containment across an SMB book, Blackpoint is the one to look at.

‍

Why MSPs shortlist competitors and switch providers

MSPs move off an incumbent MDR platform for five reasons, and only one of them is detection quality.

1. Coverage gaps beyond the endpoint. Endpoint-first platforms leave identity, email and cloud telemetry either unmonitored or sold as separate add-ons. The gap surfaces the first time a client is compromised through a token rather than a binary.

2. Per-seat economics at scale. Per-endpoint pricing works at 200 seats and stops working at 2,000, because your own contract is per user and the two curves diverge. Vendors that publish banded rates make this modellable; most do not.

3. Alert quality. Raw alert forwarding and confirmed-threat alerting are different products sold under the same three letters. A two-person network operations centre can absorb ten confirmed incidents a month. It cannot absorb four hundred alerts that might be incidents.

4. Multi-tenant administration overhead. Console switching, per-client policy drift and reporting that will not roll up across tenants cost hours nobody bills for. This is the trigger MSPs mention last and feel most.

5. Contract or minimum-commitment terms. Annual minimums and seat floors mean a churned client keeps costing you until renewal. Ask what happens to the bill when a 300-seat client leaves in month four.

‍

Alternatives at a glance

Eight platforms, ten capabilities. Delivery model and price transparency decide more MSP shortlists than detection features do, because they are the two things you cannot discover from a datasheet.

Three of eight publish a rate you can check without booking a call, and only one publishes the partner rate an MSP actually pays. Every cell above comes from the vendor's own site or marketplace listing, with the gaps filled from MDR Providers' sourced pricing index, which labels each figure by source type and date; where a vendor publishes nothing, this table says so rather than estimating.

‍

If you use X, look at Y first

The right alternative depends less on which platform you are leaving than on why you are leaving it. This maps each incumbent to the one or two competitors that actually solve the trigger, rather than to whichever vendor ranks highest on a listicle.

‍

What to compare before you commit

Six criteria decide whether an MDR platform works as an MSP delivery vehicle, and only one of them appears on a vendor datasheet.

1. Multi-tenant console depth. Ask whether client separation is real tenancy or a filtered view of one pool. Filtered views leak between clients under audit and they do not scale past twenty tenants.

2. Alert-to-noise commitment. Every vendor advertises low false positives. Ask which of them will put a number in the contract, and what happens commercially when they miss it. Most will not.

3. Channel margin and minimum commitment. Get the partner rate, the seat floor, and the answer to one question: when a 300-seat client churns in month four, does your bill drop or does the floor hold until renewal?

4. Response scope. Notify, contain and remediate are three different products. Establish who holds the isolate button, whether they need your approval to press it, and whether full incident response is included or a separate engagement.

5. RMM and PSA integration. Confirm tickets land in the remote monitoring and professional services automation tools your technicians already live in. A second queue nobody watches is worse than no integration, because it looks like coverage.

6. Exit terms. Notice period, data export format, and what happens to historical alerts on termination. Settle these before you sign rather than when you are leaving. The contract questions worth resolving up front are covered in how MSPs should choose a white-label SOC partner.

‍

The alternatives compared

Eight platforms, same four headings each, so you can read one block or all eight. If you are leaving a legacy platform rather than one of these, the alternatives to Alert Logic Threat Manager for MSPs are covered separately.

1. Huntress

Huntress is a US security vendor selling managed EDR, identity and SIEM as separate products to small IT teams and the MSP channel. Every product includes a 24/7 human-led SOC rather than charging for it as a tier. It sells direct, through resellers and through MSPs.

• Strengths: Runs alongside existing antivirus including Microsoft Defender, so there is no rip-and-replace. Per-unit rates are published. No seat minimum when a client is bought through an MSP.
• Weaknesses: Each product is priced separately, so a full stack adds up faster than the headline rate suggests. Identity coverage is a separate SKU, not bundled with endpoint. Partner rates are not published, only retail.
• Best for: MSPs with Windows and Microsoft 365 client books who want endpoint and identity depth without replacing existing tooling.
• Published pricing: Managed EDR $8.99 per endpoint per month, ITDR $4.80 per identity, Managed SIEM $4.00 per source, at the 50 to 99 band.

‍

2. Blackpoint Cyber

Blackpoint Cyber is a US MDR provider that sells exclusively through MSPs and never direct to end clients. Its platform, CompassOne, launched in April 2025 and packages detection and response alongside posture management across Essentials and Standard tiers. The SOC is built around acting on threats rather than reporting them.

• Strengths: The SOC contains confirmed threats autonomously without waiting for your approval. Network sits alongside endpoint in base coverage. Blackpoint does not sell direct, so there is no channel conflict.
• Weaknesses: No published price at any tier. Cloud, identity and SaaS are add-ons rather than base coverage. Its own agent is required. Reseller payments are reported as non-cancellable and non-refundable.
• Best for: MSPs with SMB books who want containment to happen at 3am without a phone call first.
• Published pricing: No public price. Quotes go through the MSP channel only.

‍

3. Arctic Wolf

Arctic Wolf is a US security operations vendor selling MDR to mid-market and enterprise buyers, largely direct, with a separate partner program alongside. Its Aurora platform connects to tools you already own rather than requiring its own agent. Each account gets a named Concierge Security Team.

• Strengths: Connects through APIs to tools you already own rather than requiring its own agent, so onboarding is an integration project. Unlimited data ingestion with 13 months of retention.
• Weaknesses: Remediation is guided, not performed on your behalf, so hands-on response may need a separate retainer. Direct sales create channel conflict. SaaS and cloud coverage are priced as add-ons.
• Best for: Mid-market clients needing broad coverage and a named team, where a direct vendor relationship is acceptable to you.
• Published pricing: $44,000 per year for MDR Basic, covering up to 100 users on a 12-month contract, listed on AWS Marketplace. Above 100 users moves to private offer.

‍

4. CyberQuell

We publish this comparison and we are on it. Everything below comes from our own published rate card, and the weaknesses are the ones we would raise on a first call.

CyberQuell is a Microsoft-native managed security provider running a white-label SOC for MSPs on Microsoft Sentinel and Defender, connected through Azure Lighthouse. Founded in 2024, it also sells managed security directly to mid-market organisations.

• Strengths: No setup fees and go-live within 72 hours of connection. The 15-minute response and 99.9% uptime commitments are contractual, and the published white-label SOC partner rates carry volume bands you can model against.
• Weaknesses: Minimum billing of 200 endpoints or 50 servers rules out smaller books, where Huntress has no MSP minimum at all. One-year service term. Microsoft-native by design, so non-Microsoft stacks fit poorly.
• Best for: MSPs with Microsoft-heavy client books who need a rate they can quote against without a sales cycle.
• Published pricing: Defend from $4.80 per endpoint per month, Watch from $3.12, plus base fees, with published volume bands.

‍

5. Todyl

Todyl is a US, channel-only cybersecurity vendor selling a single-agent platform that consolidates SASE, endpoint security, SIEM, MXDR, SOAR and compliance tooling. It has been packaged in three tiers, Essentials, Advanced and Complete, since September 2025. The pitch is vendor consolidation rather than best-of-breed detection.

• Strengths: One agent and one console displaces several vendors, cutting tool sprawl and per-client administration. Network and cloud are first-class surfaces rather than endpoint extensions. Compliance tooling is built in.
• Weaknesses: Full platform lock-in. You cannot bring your own EDR, SIEM or SASE, so adopting it is a forklift and leaving it is another. No published response SLA.
• Best for: MSPs consolidating greenfield SMB clients onto one vendor, particularly where secure remote access matters as much as detection.
• Published pricing: No public price. Todyl directs all pricing enquiries to a request form.

‍

6. Sophos MDR

Sophos is a UK-headquartered security vendor selling endpoint, firewall and MDR products, now operating as a combined entity with Secureworks. MDR is delivered on the Sophos Central platform, sold direct and through the MSP Flex and MSP Elevate channel programs. It sits at the established, broad-portfolio end of this comparison.

• Strengths: Mature SOC operations with a large integration surface for telemetry enrichment. MDR Complete includes full incident response. MSP Flex enables monthly billing rather than annual prepayment.
• Weaknesses: Intercept X is a full endpoint replacement, so it displaces Microsoft Defender rather than running beside it. MDR Essentials excludes full incident response. No list price published.
• Best for: MSPs already standardised on Sophos endpoints who want deeper SOC operations without changing endpoint tooling.
• Published pricing: No public price. MSP Elevate requires a $2,000 minimum monthly spend across a 12-month commitment, with MSP Flex enrolment as a prerequisite.

‍

7. CrowdStrike Falcon Complete Next-Gen MDR

CrowdStrike is a US enterprise security platform vendor, and Falcon Complete Next-Gen MDR is its fully managed service, renamed from Falcon Complete in July 2024. It sells direct to enterprise buyers, with a separate Falcon Complete for Service Providers program for partners. The service runs on CrowdStrike's own platform and nothing else.

• Strengths: The deepest endpoint detection in this set, with full-cycle remediation performed rather than recommended. Coverage extends across identity, cloud and third-party data via Falcon Next-Gen SIEM.
• Weaknesses: A 200-seat minimum rules out most SMB clients. Requires the Falcon platform, so it cannot run alongside a competing EDR. Priced for organisations that already have in-house security teams.
• Best for: MSPs whose enterprise clients need the strongest available endpoint MDR and have the budget to match.
• Published pricing: No public price.

‍

8. Guardz

Guardz is an Israeli-founded, channel-only vendor selling identity-first MDR built specifically for MSPs serving small businesses. It licenses SentinelOne as its endpoint engine, so partners get that detection without negotiating a separate contract. Identity, email, endpoint and browser coverage sit in one console.

• Strengths: Multi-tenant console built for MSPs running many small tenants. A free community tier lets you prove value on a real tenant before billing anyone. Identity, email and endpoint in one platform.
• Weaknesses: No published seat pricing, and Guardz states this is deliberate policy rather than an omission. Strongest on Microsoft 365 and weaker for Google Workspace-heavy books. Limited depth for bespoke API work.
• Best for: MSPs serving small Microsoft 365 clients who want unified coverage without hiring a security team.
• Published pricing: No public price. Tiers are named Community, Pro and Ultimate; rates are shared directly on request

‍

What switching actually involves

Moving a client book between MDR platforms is a sequencing problem, not a technical one. Run these six steps in order, because getting step six wrong is the only one that leaves a client unmonitored.

1. Overlap period length. Decide how long both platforms run in parallel and who pays for it. Validate detections and reporting on one tenant before the wider rollout rather than cutting the whole book at once.

2. Agent conflict handling. Establish whether the incoming platform runs alongside your existing agent or replaces it. If it replaces it, the old agent comes off last, after the new one is confirmed reporting, never first.

3. Policy export. Ask what transfers and what gets rebuilt by hand. Detection tuning, suppression rules and per-client exclusions rarely migrate, and rebuilding them is usually the largest hidden cost in the move.

4. Historical alert retention. Confirm what the outgoing provider hands back, in what format, and how long you have to collect it. Clients under compliance obligations need that history to survive the change.

5. Client communication. Decide who tells the client and whether it is framed as an upgrade or a swap. Under a white-label arrangement the client may not need telling at all, which is worth confirming in the contract.

6. Contract exit timing. Serve notice only once the incoming provider is live and validated. Sequence it backwards from your renewal date, because a notice period that expires before go-live leaves a gap nobody is covering.

Getting the evaluation right before any of this starts is a separate exercise, and what to look for in SOC as a Service for MSPs covers the criteria worth settling first.

If you want to model the numbers against your own book before committing to anything, our published white-label SOC partner rates include a calculator that runs your endpoint and server counts against the rate card.

‍

CyberQuell compared with Huntress, Blackpoint Cyber and Arctic Wolf

CyberQuell vs Huntress for MSPs

CyberQuell runs the SOC for you on Microsoft Sentinel and Defender under your brand, while Huntress sells you its own managed EDR platform that you deploy and manage. Huntress publishes retail per-unit rates and has no seat minimum when clients are bought through an MSP; CyberQuell publishes partner rates but requires 200 endpoints or 50 servers to start. Huntress is the better choice for an MSP with a small or fragmented book, or one that wants to own day-to-day portal management rather than hand it over.

CyberQuell vs Blackpoint Cyber for MSPs

Both sell through the MSP channel, but CyberQuell operates your existing Microsoft Sentinel and Defender tenancy, while Blackpoint requires its own agent and platform. Blackpoint's SOC contains confirmed threats autonomously without waiting for approval, and it never sells direct to end clients under any arrangement. Blackpoint is the better choice for MSPs whose clients are not on the Microsoft stack, or who want a vendor with no direct-sales relationship anywhere in its business.

CyberQuell vs Arctic Wolf for MSPs

CyberQuell delivers under your brand through the channel, while Arctic Wolf sells largely direct to end clients and assigns a named Concierge Security Team to each account. Arctic Wolf connects to tools you already own without requiring a specific stack, and publishes an AWS Marketplace rate of $44,000 a year for up to 100 users. Arctic Wolf is the better choice for a mid-market client that wants a direct vendor relationship and coverage spanning non-Microsoft tooling.

‍

The three things that stall a switch

A cheaper platform usually means a smaller bundle, not a discount

Price differences across MDR platforms reflect what is bundled rather than what is discounted. Huntress prices endpoint, identity and SIEM as separate products, so a headline per-endpoint rate is not the full stack cost. Arctic Wolf and CrowdStrike are priced for organisations with in-house security teams and carry seat minimums most SMB clients cannot meet. Ask what the number covers before you compare two of them.

Some of these platforms replace Microsoft Defender, others run beside it

Huntress runs beside Microsoft Defender, and CyberQuell operates Sentinel and Defender directly in your client's own tenancy, so the client keeps licensing Microsoft and you are not paying twice for endpoint protection. Sophos Intercept X and CrowdStrike Falcon both replace Defender, which means a rip-and-replace on every endpoint. If your clients are already Microsoft-licensed, that distinction decides more than detection quality does.

MDR satisfies controls, it does not deliver compliance

Managed detection and response usually satisfies the monitoring and response controls insurers and frameworks ask for, but no platform makes a client compliant by itself. What matters at audit is evidence: documented 24/7 coverage, incident reports, retention, and reporting you can hand to an assessor. Ask specifically what a provider hands over when a client changes provider, because gaps in that history surface at the next audit.

‍

Final thoughts

Eight platforms, and no single one wins. The decision splits on three things: whether you need the vendor to act without asking, whether your clients are already Microsoft-licensed, and whether you can model the cost before the sales call.

What should concern you more than any feature gap is that five of the eight will not tell you what they charge until you have spent a call explaining your book. That is not a detail. It is the reason MSPs end up on the wrong platform: you cannot compare what you cannot see, so the comparison happens after you have already invested time in one vendor.

If you are switching, the sequence in this page matters more than the vendor choice. Run the overlap, keep the old agent on until the new one is confirmed reporting, and serve notice last.

If you want to talk it through against your actual client book rather than a spec sheet, book a call with the CyberQuell team and we will tell you honestly whether we are the right fit for your MSP.