Home / Insights /Security-as-a-Service vs CAPEX

Security-as-a-Service vs CAPEX: Enterprise Cost Comparison for Singapore Businesses

By Biztech Group November 2024 11 min read

Enterprise security infrastructure — CCTV, access control, alarm systems — has historically been a capital expenditure. Businesses purchase hardware, pay for installation, and own the asset. But as subscription-based technology models mature, a growing number of Singapore enterprises are evaluating Security-as-a-Service (SECaaS): a monthly subscription model that includes hardware, installation, maintenance, and monitoring.

For IT and finance leaders responsible for technology procurement decisions, the question is no longer simply "which system is better" — it is "which funding model is right for our organisation at this point in time." This analysis examines the total cost of ownership across both approaches.

Defining the Two Models

Traditional CAPEX Model

Large upfront hardware and installation cost

Organisation owns the asset

Ongoing maintenance contract purchased separately

Hardware refresh every 5–8 years

Depreciated on balance sheet

Security-as-a-Service (OPEX)

Zero or minimal upfront cost

Vendor retains hardware ownership

Maintenance, monitoring included in monthly fee

Technology refresh at contract renewal

Treated as operating expense — full P&L deduction

5-Year Total Cost of Ownership: A Singapore Example

The following illustrative model compares both approaches for a 30-camera enterprise CCTV deployment across a Singapore office building:

Cost Component

CAPEX Model

SECaaS Model

Hardware (30 IP cameras + NVR)

S$28,500

S$0

Installation & commissioning

S$8,000

S$0

Annual maintenance contract (5 yrs)

S$18,000

Included

Monthly subscription fee (60 months)

S$36,000

5-Year Total Cost of Ownership

S$54,500

S$36,000

Illustrative figures for a 30-camera commercial building deployment. Actual costs vary by site complexity, camera specification, and contract terms.

Hidden Costs That Favour SECaaS

The 5-year TCO model above favours SECaaS — but the hidden costs widen the gap further:

1

Technology obsolescence

CAPEX hardware depreciates rapidly. A 4K IP camera system that is industry-standard today will likely require replacement within 6–8 years. SECaaS contracts typically include technology refreshes at renewal, ensuring you always operate on current hardware.

2

Internal IT overhead

CAPEX-owned systems require internal IT resources for firmware management, network integration, user access management, and incident triage. SECaaS offloads this to the vendor.

3

Scalability penalties

Adding cameras to a CAPEX system requires additional hardware procurement. SECaaS scales per-camera on the existing subscription — no procurement lead time, no separate installation quote.

4

Cybersecurity patching

IP cameras and NVRs have documented CVE vulnerabilities. CAPEX owners are responsible for their own patching — often a low priority for facilities teams. SECaaS vendors manage firmware security as part of the service.

When CAPEX Is Still the Right Choice

SECaaS is not always the optimal model. CAPEX may be preferable when:

Your organisation has strict data sovereignty requirements and cannot have any system managed externally

Capital budget availability and low cost of capital favour upfront investment

Existing hardware is relatively new (<3 years) and performing well

Internal IT capacity and technical expertise to manage the systems is available

Biztech CCTVaaS — Enterprise Security as a Service

Biztech Group offers a structured CCTVaaS model for Singapore enterprises: enterprise-grade IP cameras, installation, managed maintenance, remote monitoring, and 4-hour SLA — all on a single monthly subscription. No upfront capital outlay. No separate maintenance contract.

Request a SECaaS Proposal