Comparing spend to peers
Compare your security spend against anonymized peers of similar sector and size to judge whether your costs are reasonable.
Last updated September 22, 2026
Knowing what you spend is useful. Knowing whether that spend is reasonable is what changes decisions. Peer spend comparison places your spending next to peers of similar sector and size so you can tell the difference between a fair price and an outlier. It lives on the Pytheus Index.
How the comparison works
Pytheus compares your allocated spend against a pooled peer cohort drawn from organizations in your sector and size band. The comparison shows how your costs sit relative to that cohort's median and quartiles, not the individual figures of any single peer.
The output is a difference, not a verdict. Spending above the peer cohort is not automatically wrong, and spending below it is not automatically safe. A higher figure might reflect a deliberate investment in a compliance-required capability. A lower figure might mean you are underinvesting where it counts.
Reading it sensibly
Use the comparison to ask better questions, not to chase the median:
Where you spend well above peers, check whether the capability justifies it.
Where you spend below peers on a high-criticality capability, ask whether coverage is thin.
Pair the cost view with maturity. Paying more than peers for a capability you have barely matured is a clear signal to dig in.
A peer comparison is a performance difference, not a gap. It tells you how you compare, not what you must fix. The decision stays yours.
Comparisons work best read alongside your own allocation data. Start from Spend allocation, then let the peer view sharpen where you focus. Where cost looks high without a clear reason, move on to Overspend and overlap insights.