Imagine a platform for compliance costs you $12,000 per year. Does that sound expensive?
The replacement it makes will decide the final answer.
If automation eliminates hundreds of hours tedious evidence collection across a complicated technology landscape, $12,000 could be a wise investment. The calculation would be different when a team of seven people could collect the same evidence in just the time of a few minutes every month.
That’s a useful way to approach the search for a Vanta alternative. Start by asking what platform has the most features. Consider what these features can help your business save time and energy.
Automated Manufacturing Has a Break-Even Level
It’s not inherently either good or negative. The benefits of compliance automation is dependent on the size of the business. Imagine a technology company that is growing with hundreds of employees, multiple cloud environments, multiple applications, and constant access changes. Gathering evidence manually could be a major operational burden. Integrations that monitor systems automatically and collect evidence could easily justify the expense.
Imagine a startup of 10 people getting ready to go through the first SOC 2. audit. The system may be compact, and evidence collection is still manageable even without significant automation.
This is a crucial distinction when looking at Vanta pricing. While a well-developed platform can have many features but they only have value when the organization is in need of them.
Compare Architecture And Not Just Brands
A search for Vanta vs Drata can quickly become an exercise in feature-by-feature. Both are trusted compliance platforms built around automation and integrations. Hence, the comparison of their frameworks supported including integrations, service agreements, and individual quotes could be beneficial for companies looking to implement this approach.
There’s another choice to make first, however. Is your company interested in an integration-driven platform for compliance? Certain businesses would prefer automated evidence collection as well as continuous monitoring. Others would rather provide evidence themselves, particularly when the amount of work remains minimal.
Vanta Competitors Do Not All Utilize the same model
A number of famous Vanta competitors compete in an identical category that is focused on automation. There are also platforms that are less heavy that concentrate on organization over large system connectivity.
CertAssist is part of the latter group. It was developed by compliance consultants and internal auditors, CertAssist organizes framework controls in a single workstation, allows for the editing of policies and evidence guidance, and lets auditors review submitted evidence via restricted access.
It deliberately does not connect to operational systems or create infrastructure agents. Customers can upload their own evidence.
System Access is a consideration in the Decision
Removal of integrations has its downsides. Someone has to be able to manually collect evidence.
This is a way to eliminate the need for integration and the application of compliance is not dependent upon an integration with the operating environment.
Both are equally effective. The important question is which choice is best for your business.
CertAssist aims at teams that have between five and 200 employees and gives pricing information, instead of having an actual sales call. Its official launch price is $225 per month, compared with a regular price of $375 per month.
Let Complexity Find Its Proper Place
Needs for startups today with a staff of 10 are not necessarily the same as those of an organization with 100 or 500 employees.
Compliance can be managed with a simple platform. Automation’s cost-effectiveness can grow as systems, staff and frameworks grow. It is better to let the complexity of technology for compliance to earn its place.
Spending money on fifty integrations just because they look attractive in a comparison table isn’t worth the cost. They’re worth the cost in situations where the task they replace is more expensive than doing them manually.