Say it plainly at the top: Evidr makes one of the products in this comparison. Read it with that in mind. What we have tried to do is compare on things you can verify yourself rather than on adjectives, and say where each competitor is the better choice.
Why 2027 is the cycle to prepare for now
If you want a SOC 2 Type II report covering any part of 2027, the work starts well before January. The arithmetic is unforgiving.
- 3 moShortest observation window most auditors acceptSix or twelve months is more credible with enterprise buyers
- 3-8 wkTypical remediation before the window can startPolicies, MFA, logging, access reviews
- 2-6 wkFrom end of fieldwork to the report landingNot under your control
- Q3When good auditors are usually booked out toTheir calendar drives your date, not your readiness
Work backwards from a report in hand by mid-2027 and the platform decision needs making in the next quarter or two, not next summer. That is the only reason this is a 2027 article rather than a 2026 one.
What actually separates these platforms
Feature grids in this category are close to identical, because everyone ships the same five things: integration-based evidence collection, cross-framework control mapping, policy generation, continuous monitoring and an auditor portal. The real differences are commercial and operational.
- 01Pricing modelPublished or quote-only, flat or per-framework, and what happens at renewal. This is the biggest cost variable and the least discussed.
- 02Framework economicsWhether adding ISO 27001 next to SOC 2 costs nothing or doubles the bill.
- 03Who does the workSoftware that shows you the gap, versus a service that closes it. Very different products at very different prices.
- 04Support modelDocs and a chatbot, shared Slack, or a named human. Matters most when you are three weeks from fieldwork.
- 05Time to first valueSelf-serve in an afternoon, or a six-week paid implementation.
The comparison
Everything in the Evidr column is checkable against our pricing page. Everything in the other columns is drawn from what those vendors publish publicly at the time of writing. Where a vendor does not publish something, the cell says so rather than guessing, because a precise invented number would be worse than an honest gap.
| EvidrThis is us | Vanta | Drata | Secureframe | Sprinto | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pricing publishedA number on the website, no sales call | |||||
| Entry priceLowest paid tier | $499/mo billed annually | Quote only | Quote only | Quote only | Quote only |
| Free plan, no card | |||||
| Frameworks included in the price | All 14 | Tiered / add-on | Tiered / add-on | Tiered / add-on | Tiered / add-on |
| Cost to add a second framework | $0 | Quote | Quote | Quote | Quote |
| Penetration test run in-houseBy the vendor own team, not a referral | |||||
| Dedicated support engineerA named human, on the higher tiers | Enterprise tiers | Enterprise tiers | Included | Included | |
| Custom plans built to requirement | |||||
| Read-only integrations | |||||
| Auditor portal | |||||
| Self-serve start, no demo required | |||||
| Brand recognition with procurementWhere the bigger names genuinely win | Low | Highest | High | High | Medium |
Who each one is actually for
The most recognised name in the category and the safest answer if your buyer, board or procurement team wants a brand they already know. Very large integration catalogue and a mature auditor partner network. Pricing is quote-only and third-party procurement data shows a wide range, so budget for a sales cycle before you can even compare. Choose it when recognition and breadth matter more than cost predictability.
Strong automation and broad framework coverage, built for cloud-first teams that want continuous monitoring across several frameworks at once. Like Vanta, quote-only. Frequently shortlisted alongside Vanta and the two are hard to separate on capability for a standard SOC 2 or ISO 27001 programme. Choose it if the demo lands better with your team, and negotiate hard on renewal uplift.
Known for a guided workflow and hands-on support, which suits teams with nobody in a compliance role who want to be walked through it. Structured control mapping and assisted onboarding. Also quote-only. Choose it if you want more hand-holding than software and can carry the cost.
Positions on speed to readiness with pre-mapped frameworks, and publishes a very large volume of content in this space. Popular with startups outside the US. Quote-only. Choose it if the pre-mapped approach fits your stack closely and you want to move fast.
Published pricing from $499 a month billed annually, a genuinely free Starter plan with no card, and all fourteen frameworks on every paid plan rather than per-framework charges. Penetration testing is run by our own team from inside the product rather than referred out. Dedicated support engineer and on-call onboarding assistance on the higher tiers, and custom plans built around specific requirements. The honest weakness is recognition: we are newer and smaller, and if your procurement team wants a name they have seen before, that is a real reason to choose someone else.
The pricing models, and the one that bites
| Model | How it works | What to watch |
|---|---|---|
| Per framework | Base fee, then a charge per framework | Cost multiplies the moment a customer asks for ISO 27001 as well as SOC 2 |
| Per employee | Scales with headcount | Your bill grows when you hire, unrelated to compliance work |
| Flat tier | A plan price covering a defined feature set | Check what is excluded from the tier you were quoted |
| Quote only | No published price, figure given after a sales call | You cannot build a shortlist without entering a sales process with each vendor |
The buyer checklist
Run every shortlisted vendor through these. They separate platforms in a way the feature grid does not.
- Bring your real integration list, not their logo wall, and check coverage item by item. The long tail is where platforms diverge.
- Ask for a live demo of the auditor view specifically. Nobody demos it, and it is the screen you will live inside during fieldwork.
- Get the marginal cost of one more framework as a number, not a reassurance.
- Ask what happens to a control no connector can evidence. There is always a manual path; the question is how good it is.
- Ask who runs your penetration test and whether it is included, referred or billed separately.
- Ask about export on exit: what formats, what is included, how long it takes.
- Ask for the year two and year three price in writing.
- Speak to two reference customers at your size and stage, not the first two offered.
If you are a startup
The pattern we see most: a first enterprise deal stalls on a security questionnaire, SOC 2 becomes urgent, and the team discovers the platform quotes are a meaningful fraction of the contract they are trying to close. Three things worth knowing:
- A Type I will usually unblock the deal, with a commitment to Type II inside twelve months. It is far faster and cheaper than waiting for a Type II.
- Scope to Security alone on the first report. Every additional Trust Services Category is more evidence and more audit hours, and buyers rarely ask for the others up front.
- The platform is not the biggest line item. The audit fee and the penetration test usually are. Price the whole programme before you fall in love with a demo.
What none of these can do
Worth stating, because the marketing in this category is enthusiastic:
- None of them can issue your report. SOC 2 reports come from licensed CPA firms; ISO 27001 certificates from accredited certification bodies. Auditor partner networks are referrals, not inclusion.
- None of them makes you secure. A dashboard reading 98 percent is reporting on the controls you told it about.
- None of them can manufacture history. If quarterly access reviews did not happen, no tool produces evidence that they did.
- None of them replaces the person who owns the programme. They make that person much faster. They do not remove the role.