Imagine a compliance platform that costs you $12,000 per year. Does that sound pricey?

The answer depends on what it replaces.

If you invest $12,000 to cut down on hundreds of hours collecting evidence in an extremely complex technology environment this could be money well invested. If a small business of seven people could gather the same data manually, in a couple of hours each month, the figure looks considerably different.

It’s a smart way to start the search for Vanta. Don’t begin by asking which one has the most features. Consider how many hours and time these features could save your business.

The Break-Even point for automation

Compliance automation isn’t inherently good or bad. The benefits of compliance automation changes as the company grows. Imagine a rapidly growing tech company with multiple cloud environments as well as multiple applications. The burden of manually collecting evidence continuously could become very difficult. Integrations that automatically monitor systems and take evidence are able to justify the cost.

Think about a company with 10 employees who are preparing for their first SOC 2. The system may be small, and evidence collection could remain manageable without extensive automation.

This is a crucial distinction when looking at Vanta pricing. The capabilities of a sophisticated platform are impressive, but they only provide financial value in the event that an organization requires them.

Compare Architecture and not just Brands

A search for Vanta vs Drata can quickly become a feature-by-feature exercise. Both platforms are based around automation and interconnected with each other, which means that companies looking for this method can benefit from having a look at the frameworks available, their integrations and service along with individual quotations and contracts.

There’s another decision to make first, however. Do you want to use an integration-driven platform for compliance at all? Some businesses prefer continuous monitoring, automated evidence collection, and automated evidence gathering. Other businesses would prefer to create their own evidence, particularly when their workload is small.

Vanta Competitors do not follow the same model

A lot of Vanta competitors are also in the same category, which focuses on automation. There are platforms with a lighter design that are more focused on organization rather than connectivity.

CertAssist is part of the latter category. The product was created by compliance consultants as well as internal auditors, CertAssist organizes framework controls in a single workstation, allows for the editing of policies and evidence guidelines, and lets auditors review submitted evidence through access to only read-only.

It does not set up agents or connect to the infrastructure system. Customers upload and choose the documents they would like to provide.

Consideration should be given to the access to the system.

The removal of integrations does not come without its drawbacks. One must manually collect evidence.

It also gets rid of integration setup and this means that the compliance application does not require standing connections to the operational environment.

The architectures are not universally superior. Which choice is best for your company?

CertAssist is a solution for teams with between five to 200 members. The price is disclosed rather than having to make an appointment with sales representatives to find the initial price. Its official launch price is $225 per month compared with a regular price of $375 per month.

Let Complexity Get Its Due

Today’s needs for a startup with a staff of 10 are not necessarily the same as those of the company that has 100 or 500 workers.

Although compliance is easy, a lightweight platform may be a good idea. As employees, systems, frameworks, and evidence requirements expand, the economics may eventually favor deeper automation. Let complexity be the primary factor when buying compliance technologies.

Don’t pay for fifty integrations because they appear impressive in a chart of comparison. You should pay for them only when they are necessary and the cost for doing the work manually is more expensive.