Detection as Code

Hunters vs Sekoia.io

Hunters totals 3.44 and Sekoia totals 3.46 on the 10 point detection-as-code rubric (sources read 2026-11-03 and 2026-11-04). The totals sit within 0.25, too close for the evidence to separate them. The pair turns on rule languages: Sekoia documents it in full, and Hunters publishes nothing on it. Neither publishes anything on pricing.

The difference that decides this pair

The largest weighted gap on the rubric is rule languages and conversion paths: Sekoia.io scores 4.0 against 3.0 for Hunters, which is 0.15 of the 10 point total.

Hunters names no rule language and normalises data to OCSF; Sekoia, by contrast, runs native Sigma YAML, including event_count, value_count and temporal correlation, alongside its own SOL queries. docs.sekoia.com read 2026-11-03 hunters.security read 2026-11-04

Rubric side by side

Hunters totals 3.44 and Sekoia.io totals 3.46 out of 10. The two totals are within 0.25 of each other, too close for the evidence to separate them.

Rubric criteria for Hunters and Sekoia.io, scores out of 10. A plus marks a criterion where Sekoia.io scores higher, a minus where Hunters does.

MarkerCriterionWeightHuntersSekoia.io
+Rule languages and conversion paths153.04.0
+Git-native workflow and CI/CD183.03.5
-Testing154.03.5
-Coverage analytics124.03.5
-Rule health183.53.0
Versioning and rollback83.03.0
Content library size and freshness84.04.0
Pricing transparency63.03.0
Total1003.443.46

The 33 capabilities as a diff

Read it as a diff from Hunters to Sekoia.io: 11 of 33 rows differ. A plus marks a row where Sekoia.io documents more (9 rows), a minus a row where Hunters documents more (2 rows). Rows with no marker match.

Capability rows for Hunters and Sekoia.io, grouped. Changed rows are shaded and carry a marker.

MarkerCapabilityHuntersSekoia.io
Languages
Sekoia.io documents moreSigma nativeHunters, Sigma native: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Sigma native: documenteddocumented
Sigma conversionHunters, Sigma conversion: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Sigma conversion: not documentednot documented
YARA-LHunters, YARA-L: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, YARA-L: not documentednot documented
SPLHunters, SPL: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, SPL: not documentednot documented
KQLHunters, KQL: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, KQL: not documentednot documented
EQL or ES|QLHunters, EQL or ES|QL: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, EQL or ES|QL: not documentednot documented
PythonHunters, Python: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Python: not documentednot documented
Hunters documents moreVisual builderHunters, Visual builder: partialpartialSekoia.io, Visual builder: not documentednot documented
YARAHunters, YARA: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, YARA: not documentednot documented
Sekoia.io documents moreLucene or KQL-likeHunters, Lucene or KQL-like: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Lucene or KQL-like: partialpartial
Source control and CI
Git syncHunters, Git sync: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Git sync: not documentednot documented
PR deployHunters, PR deploy: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, PR deploy: not documentednot documented
CLIHunters, CLI: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, CLI: not documentednot documented
Sekoia.io documents moreRule APIHunters, Rule API: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Rule API: documenteddocumented
CI examplesHunters, CI examples: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, CI examples: not documentednot documented
Env promotionHunters, Env promotion: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Env promotion: not documentednot documented
Testing
Sekoia.io documents moreUnit testsHunters, Unit tests: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Unit tests: partialpartial
ReplayHunters, Replay: documenteddocumentedSekoia.io, Replay: documenteddocumented
Synthetic eventsHunters, Synthetic events: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Synthetic events: not documentednot documented
Sekoia.io documents moreBacktest reportsHunters, Backtest reports: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Backtest reports: partialpartial
Test coverageHunters, Test coverage: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Test coverage: not documentednot documented
Coverage analytics
ATT&CK mapHunters, ATT&CK map: documenteddocumentedSekoia.io, ATT&CK map: documenteddocumented
Hunters documents moreGap viewHunters, Gap view: documenteddocumentedSekoia.io, Gap view: partialpartial
Data sourcesHunters, Data sources: partialpartialSekoia.io, Data sources: partialpartial
Log source healthHunters, Log source health: partialpartialSekoia.io, Log source health: partialpartial
Rule health
Noisy rulesHunters, Noisy rules: partialpartialSekoia.io, Noisy rules: partialpartial
Sekoia.io documents moreBroken rulesHunters, Broken rules: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Broken rules: partialpartial
Field driftHunters, Field drift: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Field drift: not documentednot documented
Sekoia.io documents moreRule costHunters, Rule cost: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Rule cost: partialpartial
Sekoia.io documents moreLifecycleHunters, Lifecycle: partialpartialSekoia.io, Lifecycle: documenteddocumented
Library
Sekoia.io documents moreLibrary countHunters, Library count: partialpartialSekoia.io, Library count: documenteddocumented
CommunityHunters, Community: not documentednot documentedSekoia.io, Community: not documentednot documented
CadenceHunters, Cadence: partialpartialSekoia.io, Cadence: partialpartial

documenteddocumentedpartialpartialnot documentednot documented

Sources for the rows that differ

Verdict by buyer type

Which of the two fits each kind of team.

BuyerVerdict
a team starting from scratch with SigmaSekoia is the better fit: it runs native Sigma YAML, correlation rules included, but documents no CI workflow; Hunters documents no Sigma path.
Microsoft Sentinel estateNeither Hunters nor Sekoia documents a path for this buyer, so it does not separate them.
Elastic estateNeither Hunters nor Sekoia documents a path for this buyer, so it does not separate them.

When to pick each

Hunters: Pick Hunters when coverage analytics is the deciding need: it draws a Threat Coverage map on ATT&CK v14 with uncovered techniques in gray.

Sekoia.io: Pick Sekoia when CI and deployment is the deciding need: it documents a POST endpoint for creating Sigma rules and no git sync or CLI. It also leads on rule languages.

Profiles: Hunters, Sekoia.io. Alternatives: to Hunters, to Sekoia.io.