Compliance platform comparison
Secureframe's typical price is lower ($20,000 median against $25,000 median). Both publish 300+ integrations. Drata is listed by more audit firms in SOC2Auditors.org's directory (49 vs 13). On G2, Drata rates 4.7 from 1,397 reviews and Secureframe 4.7 from 835.
Short verdict: which one fits you
A fit guide, not a ranking. We don't pick an overall winner.
Choose Drata if…
Neither runs the audit itself. If you want software and audit from one provider, compare Thoropass. [3]
Compliance automation platform with custom tests, compliance checks in infrastructure code and a dedicated auditor portal.
Compliance platform sold as named packages (Fundamentals, Complete, Defense) with expert guidance.
Secureframe's typical price is lower ($20,000 median against $25,000 median).
Observed annual contract values reported by Vendr, read 5 October 2026. These are different buyers and scopes, not quotes. [2]
| Attribute | Drata | Secureframe |
|---|---|---|
| Typical annual price | $25,000 medianThird-party[2] | $20,000 medianThird-party[2] |
| Observed contract range (Vendr) | $9,415 to $68,250Third-party[2] | $7,733 to $32,575Third-party[2] |
Before comparing totals, get both quotes on the same written scope: employees, frameworks, modules, implementation, support level, contract term, renewal cap and the auditor's fee as its own line.
Both publish 300+ integrations.
| Attribute | Drata | Secureframe |
|---|---|---|
| Integrations | ||
| Default test cadence | Daily (7 pm PT)Vendor-reported[11] | Daily to monthly, by testThird-party[13] |
On G2, "Limited integrations" is among Drata's most-mentioned complaints (43 G2 mentions). [8]
On G2, "Integration issues" is among Secureframe's most-mentioned complaints (184 G2 mentions). [1]
Integration counts are vendor claims and are counted differently by each vendor. Test the systems you depend on during a trial.
Drata lists 30+; Secureframe doesn't publish a count.
| Attribute | Drata | Secureframe |
|---|---|---|
| Frameworks published | Not disclosedNot disclosed[3] | |
| ISO 27001 | IncludedThird-party[3] | IncludedThird-party[3] |
| HIPAA | IncludedThird-party[3] | IncludedThird-party[3] |
From SOC2Auditors.org capability profiles and vendor plan pages. "Not disclosed" means we could not confirm either way; it does not mean the feature is missing.
| Attribute | Drata | Secureframe |
|---|---|---|
| Auditor workspace | IncludedVendor-reported[11] | IncludedVendor-reported[12] |
| Trust centre | IncludedThird-party[3] | IncludedThird-party[3] |
| SCIM provisioning | Add-on or higher tierVendor-reported[5] | Add-on or higher tierVendor-reported[12] |
| Audit from the same provider | Not offeredThird-party[3] | Not offeredThird-party[3] |
| Self-hosting option | Not disclosedNot disclosed[3] | Not disclosedNot disclosed[3] |
Drata is listed by more audit firms in SOC2Auditors.org's directory (49 vs 13).
| Attribute | Drata | Secureframe |
|---|---|---|
| Audit firms in the directory | 49 directory firmsThird-party[4] | 13 directory firmsThird-party[4] |
| Audit from the same provider | Not offeredThird-party[3] | Not offeredThird-party[3] |
Drata doesn't sell the audit; you hire a firm separately. Secureframe doesn't sell the audit; you hire a firm separately. Directory counts are firms that list each platform, not partnerships or quality ratings. [4]
On G2, Drata rates 4.7 from 1,397 reviews and Secureframe 4.7 from 835.
| G2 | 1,397 reviews |
|---|
| G2 | 835 reviews |
|---|
G2 time to implement: Drata 2 months, Secureframe 2 months. Mention counts scale with review volume, so compare them as proportions, not totals. [1]
Screenshots published by each vendor on its website or G2 listing, credited below each image.
Use a trial or sandbox to connect your cloud provider, identity provider and code host, and check that each produces evidence without manual uploads.
An auditor who already works in a platform usually needs less back-and-forth on evidence.
Employees, frameworks, modules, support level, contract term, renewal cap, and the audit as its own line.
SSO, SCIM, extra frameworks, questionnaires and trust-centre features are often tier-gated. Ask for the full price of the scope you need.
Confirm you can export policies, evidence with timestamps and test history, and whether read-only access continues after the contract ends.
Answers use the figures on this page. Where something isn't disclosed, the answer says so.
Secureframe's typical price is lower ($20,000 median against $25,000 median). Prices depend on employees, frameworks and modules, so compare quotes for the same written scope.
Both publish 300+ integrations. Counts are vendor claims; test the systems you depend on.
Drata is listed by more audit firms in SOC2Auditors.org's directory (49 vs 13).
On G2, Drata rates 4.7 from 1,397 reviews and Secureframe 4.7 from 835. Ratings come from self-selected reviewers.
G2 reviewers report 2 months for Drata and 2 months for Secureframe. Your own timeline depends on scope and how much evidence already exists.
Drata doesn't sell the audit; you hire a firm separately. Secureframe doesn't sell the audit; you hire a firm separately.
You can, but it is risky during a Type 2 observation period, because your auditor needs continuous evidence for the whole period. Most teams switch between observation periods.
