Drata and Vanta are both AI-assisted GRC platforms with quote-based pricing, but they disclose different things — Vanta publishes its founding year,…
Best for Drata: Teams specifically concerned with governing AI agents operating inside their own environment (Drata's agent governance and discovery feature) alongside standard SOC 2/ISO 27001 automation.
Best for Vanta: Teams that want more visible platform structure before a sales call — named tiers, a stated integration count, and disclosed founding/HQ details — plus an AI agent that drafts policies directly.
At a Glance
Drata
Vanta
Primary category
Security
Security
Rating
Not documented
Not documented
Pricing model
Subscription (custom, annual contracts)
custom
Starting price
Custom pricing, typically starting around $7,500-$15,000/year (third-party estimates)
From approximately $10,000/year (custom quote-based pricing)
Free plan
Not documented
Not documented
Free trial
Not documented
Not documented
Platforms
Web
Web
Team collaboration
Not documented
Not documented
AI features
Yes
Yes
Public API
Yes
Not documented
Key Differences
Company transparency
Drata: Founding year and headquarters are not stated.
Vanta: Founded in 2018, headquartered in San Francisco with additional offices in New York, Sydney, Dublin, and London.
Disclosed company details can matter for vendor due diligence and long-term stability assessment.
Stated customer base
Drata: States 8,500+ global customers with a 4.8/5.0 G2 rating.
Vanta: States 16,000+ customers across startups, mid-market, and enterprise.
Customer scale can be a proxy for market traction and platform maturity.
Integration ecosystem
Drata: Integration list is not detailed on the homepage.
Vanta: States 400+ tool integrations explicitly.
A documented integration count helps buyers gauge compatibility with their existing stack upfront.
Distinct AI features
Drata: AI questionnaire assistance plus Agent governance that discovers and governs AI agents operating in enterprise environments.
Vanta: Vanta AI Agent drafts policies, completes questionnaires, and flags compliance issues.
One AI feature set focuses on governing AI agents as a security risk; the other focuses on automating GRC busywork directly.
Published plan structure
Drata: No pricing_plans are listed; the site directs to a demo or contact-sales flow.
Vanta: Publishes four named tiers — Essentials, Plus, Professional, Enterprise — each with distinct feature sets, even though prices are quote-based.
Seeing a named tier structure with feature deltas helps buyers scope requirements before talking to sales.
Feature-by-Feature
Compliance Automation
Feature
Drata
Vanta
Continuous control monitoring
Available
Available
Multi-framework support
Available
Available
Trust Center (public compliance page)
Available
Available
Third-party risk management
Available
Available
AI Capabilities
Feature
Drata
Vanta
AI-drafted questionnaire responses
Available
Available
AI agent for policy drafting
Not documented
Available
AI governance of AI agents (discovery/policy enforcement)
Available
Not documented
Company & Scale
Feature
Drata
Vanta
Founded year disclosed
Not documented
Available
Headquarters disclosed
Not documented
Available
Customer base size stated
Available
Available
Integration count stated
Not documented
Available
Pricing & Plans
Feature
Drata
Vanta
Published plan tiers
Not documented
Available
Public starting price
Unavailable
Unavailable
Pricing Compared
Starting price reflects the lowest paid tier, not the full cost for every team size or usage level.
Continuous, automated monitoring reduces manual audit-prep work throughout the year
Broad framework coverage lets one evidence base support multiple certifications
Large, vetted auditor network streamlines running the actual audit
Trusted by well-known technology companies, reflecting strong enterprise credibility
Cons
Pricing is not published and requires a sales conversation, making budgeting harder upfront
Third-party estimates put annual costs from roughly 7,500 up to 100,000 dollars depending on scope, a wide range
Primarily suited to companies with a modern cloud stack; less turnkey for legacy on-premise environments
Multi-framework, multi-integration setups can require significant initial configuration effort
Vanta
Pros
Significantly reduces the manual work of compliance evidence collection through automation
Supports many frameworks from a single connected control set
Large integration library covering most common cloud and SaaS tools
Well-regarded by analysts, named a Leader in Forrester's GRC Platforms Wave for Q2 2026
Strong brand recognition that customers and auditors are familiar with
Cons
Pricing is opaque and requires a sales conversation, which can be a friction point for small teams
Annual contracts and add-ons can get expensive as a company scales frameworks and vendors
Automated monitoring does not replace the cost of the independent audit itself
Initial setup and control mapping still requires meaningful internal time investment
Use Cases
Choose Drata: Teams specifically concerned with governing AI agents operating inside their own environment (Drata's agent governance and discovery feature) alongside standard SOC 2/ISO 27001 automation.
Choose Vanta: Teams that want more visible platform structure before a sales call — named tiers, a stated integration count, and disclosed founding/HQ details — plus an AI agent that drafts policies directly.
Need both: Buyers running a competitive GRC RFP naturally evaluate both, since neither publishes actual prices and the meaningful differences (integration counts, AI feature framing, company scale) only surface once both vendors provide quotes.
Drata
Achieving SOC 2 for the first time — An early-stage SaaS startup uses Drata to collect evidence and pass its first SOC 2 Type II audit in order to close enterprise deals.
Maintaining continuous compliance year-round — A scale-up with existing certifications uses continuous monitoring to catch control drift immediately instead of scrambling before each audit renewal.
Supporting multi-framework enterprise sales — A growing company pursuing ISO 27001 and HIPAA alongside SOC 2 reuses a shared evidence base across all three frameworks to unblock enterprise contracts.
Vanta
First SOC 2 Audit for Startups — Early-stage companies use Vanta to stand up security controls and collect audit evidence ahead of their first SOC 2 Type I or Type II report, often required to close enterprise sales deals.
Multi-Framework Compliance at Scale — Mid-market and enterprise security teams use Vanta to manage overlapping requirements across SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, and GDPR from a single control set.
Vendor Risk Reviews — Procurement and security teams use Vanta's vendor risk module to assess and continuously monitor the security posture of third-party suppliers.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do Drata and Vanta publish pricing?
No — both require contacting sales. Vanta's four tiers (Essentials, Plus, Professional, Enterprise) are all quote-based, and Drata's site directs visitors to a demo or contact-sales flow without published plans.
How many customers does each claim?
Drata states 8,500+ global customers with a 4.8/5.0 G2 rating; Vanta states 16,000+ customers across startups, mid-market, and enterprise.
What frameworks do they support?
Drata supports SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, DORA, FedRAMP, and CMMC; Vanta supports SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, GDPR, HITRUST, NIST AI RMF, ISO 42001, FedRAMP, CMMC, and 15+ other frameworks.
Do they offer AI features?
Both do, differently — Drata uses AI agents to draft security questionnaire responses and to discover and govern AI agents operating in a company's environment; Vanta's AI Agent drafts policies, completes questionnaires, and flags compliance issues.
When was each company founded?
Vanta was founded in 2018 and is headquartered in San Francisco (with additional offices in New York, Sydney, Dublin, and London); Drata's founding year and headquarters are not stated in the available facts.