CYFLARE VS. HUNTRESS
Cyflare vs. Huntress for
MSP security operations
Huntress is a strong detection layer for SMBs. If you need a security operations system that responds within 8.3 minutes on critical cases and builds a compliance-ready evidence trail, that’s a different conversation.
8.3 min
MTTR on critical cases
<1%
False positive rate
400+
Security integrations
670+
Detections built on pre-built playbooks
One Cyflare partner piloted Huntress for Microsoft 365 and Entra ID identity monitoring, specifically to see if it could outperform Cyflare’s existing coverage. To keep the test fair, they asked Cyflare to mute its standard identity alerting so Huntress ran independently.
When a real account takeover hit, Cyflare’s remaining correlation logic caught it and cut off the threat actor about three hours before Huntress sent its first notification on the same activity, with Cyflare running on reduced visibility, on purpose.
LET'S BE STRAIGHT
Huntress is a good tool. It's not a security operations system.
When you’re weighing Cyflare vs. Huntress for MSP security operations, here’s the honest version: Huntress built something MSPs genuinely trust. A lightweight agent, human-reviewed alerts, and clean remediation instructions your tier-one tech can follow. For an MSP that wants a simple detection layer on top of an AV, it works.
The gap shows up when the conversation gets harder. A client asks for a compliance report. A breach happens at 2 a.m., and the question is who’s taking the call. A partner tries to build a security practice that scales without adding headcount for every new client. MSPs are also a bigger target than they used to be, not a side note.
Huntress doesn’t have answers for those problems. Cyflare does.
HOW THEY COMPARE
How Cyflare and Huntress compare on MSP security operations
| Huntress | Cyflare | |
|---|---|---|
| Response model | Human-reviewed alerts flag likely threats and hand your team the remediation steps. | A 24/7 SOC investigates and responds directly, with 8.3-minute average containment on critical cases. |
| Detection depth | EDR, ITDR, and SIEM run as separate products, each tuned to its own alert volume. | 670+ detections mapped to curated response playbooks, run as one connected system, not three. |
| Coverage model | Detection, identity, and posture sold and run separately. MSPs assemble the bundle themselves. | Individual SKUs, but every one runs through Cyflare ONE: a single operational view. |
| Platform consolidation | Centers on identity and endpoint. Visibility elsewhere depends on what's connected. | 400+ integrations, tool-agnostic by design, ingests from whatever you already run, as even Huntress's own research flags as a growing exposure. |
| Compliance evidence | Alerts and remediation notes live in the console. No formatted audit trail for a client's compliance review. | CMMC Level 2 certified. Every response carries a built-in, exportable audit trail. |
| Partner economics | Per-module pricing that compounds every time you add a product. | 40%+ partner margins in one relationship. Adding coverage doesn't add a tax. |
NOT JUST MANAGED, CYFLARE
Why the math favors Cyflare specifically
<1%
Alerts your team can trust
False positive rate (0.5% FP, YTD 2026 average). What fires is a real threat, not noise for an analyst to sort through.
91.3%
Signal, not noise
Noise reduction from raw ingestion to real incidents, so analyst time goes to actual threats, not alert volume.
670+
Coverage that's already built
Detections are mapped to roughly 450 curated response playbooks, so incidents get a tested response, not an improvised one.
$0
Liability that doesn't land on you
Breach Response Retainer, backed by the Beckage Firm. A legally guided response is in place before you need it, not after.
THE PART THAT GETS UNDERESTIMATED
Why "just hire someone" doesn't get you real 24/7 coverage
True around-the-clock coverage means someone watching the queue for all 8,760 hours in a year. One analyst can’t do that alone. Once you account for shift rotations, PTO, and the training time that pulls people off the floor, covering a single seat continuously takes real redundancy, not one hire.
For an MSP, that number doesn’t get smaller as you take on more clients. It holds whether you’re covering ten environments or four hundred.
DO THE MATH
Run the numbers for your own book of business
Enter your own figures. This uses $1.3M in annual SOC staffing costs as the baseline, not a Cyflare price quote.
Run the numbers for your book of business
Enter your own figures. This uses $1.3M in annual SOC staffing costs as the baseline, not a Cyflare price quote.
Where does the $1.3M baseline come from?
This is salary only, before benefits, overhead, SIEM, EDR/XDR, or case management tooling, all of which push the real number higher. Both figures come from independent, vendor-neutral research, not a security vendor's own estimate. Staffing figure: SANS, 2025 SOC Survey. Salary figure: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, median annual wage for Information Security Analysts, May 2025 (most recent OEWS release, published 2026).
Enter a value in both fields to calculate your numbers.
Baseline: $1.3M in annual salary alone to staff an in-house SOC to industry standard. See "Where does the $1.3M baseline come from?" above for the full breakdown and sources. This is a directional estimate based on the figures you enter, not a quote.
COMMON QUESTIONS
What MSPs ask before they move off Huntress
Is Cyflare better than Huntress for MSPs?
For MSPs that need a full security operations system, not just endpoint detection, Cyflare is the stronger fit. Huntress is a well-regarded detection tool, but its alerts are human-reviewed and handed back to your team to act on. Cyflare's SOC investigates and responds directly, with an 8.3-minute average containment time on critical cases.
What are the best Huntress alternatives for MSPs?
Cyflare is one of the strongest alternatives for MSPs that have outgrown a detection-only tool and need 24/7 SOC coverage, compliance-ready evidence, and channel-first economics. Instead of per-module pricing that compounds with every product added, Cyflare partners see 40%+ margins in a single relationship.
What's the actual difference between Cyflare and Huntress?
Huntress detects and alerts. Cyflare detects, investigates, and responds. Huntress runs EDR, ITDR, and SIEM as separate, individually tuned products. Cyflare runs 670+ detections through one connected platform, Cyflare ONE, backed by 400+ integrations across whatever stack you already have.
Can I switch from Huntress to Cyflare without losing my existing EDR?
Yes. Cyflare is tool-agnostic across 400+ integrations, so your current EDR, firewall, or identity stack plugs into Cyflare's SOC instead of getting replaced. What changes is who's watching it and who responds when something fires.
Does Cyflare replace Huntress, or can it run alongside it?
Most MSPs move fully off Huntress once they need real SOC coverage instead of endpoint alerts alone. If you'd rather keep Huntress running as an agent, Cyflare can ingest that telemetry instead of replacing the tool outright. Either way, Cyflare's SOC becomes the one investigating and responding.
Is Cyflare or Huntress better for MSP compliance and audit requirements?
Cyflare is the stronger fit for MSPs under compliance pressure. It's CMMC Level 2 certified, and every response carries a built-in, exportable audit trail you can hand a client's auditor. Huntress's alerts and remediation notes live in its console without a formatted evidence trail built for compliance review.
Huntress got you this far. It's not built for what's next.
You don’t have to rip out what’s working. Move the SOC coverage, the response ownership, and the audit trail over to Cyflare, and keep whatever’s still earning its place in your current stack.
