How we compare
Compared on architecture rather than feature lists, because architecture is what still holds in twelve months.
Where this platform sits
Categories of tool, not a scoreboard. Several of these do their own job well, and some of them sit alongside this one rather than against it.
Compliance automation platforms
Platforms such as Vanta, Drata and Secureframe automate readiness for SOC 2 and ISO 27001 across many integrations, with policy management and questionnaire workflow at the centre.
Where we differ. European frameworks are the primary target here, not a mapping added later. NIS2 carries 82 rules and DORA 81, both evaluated against Azure resource properties directly. Nothing on this platform holds write access to your estate.
Cloud security platforms
CNAPP tools such as Wiz, Orca and Prisma Cloud discover risk across cloud estates and rank it by exploitability, built for security teams operating at scale.
Where we differ. The output here is an evidence record rather than a prioritised risk queue: a rule identifier, the resource, the property, expected and actual value, timestamped and immutable for seven years. Priced for a European SME rather than an enterprise security function.
Consultancy-led audit
Advisory firms deliver assessment and attestation with human expertise applied to your specific context.
Where we differ. Continuous rather than point-in-time, and a different order of cost. Where consultancy remains the right answer, this makes the evidence-gathering half of the engagement considerably shorter.
What does not change
Read-only forever. No write path exists, on any plan, under any failure mode.
All processing and storage in Azure North Europe and West Europe, under an Irish-incorporated entity.
437 deterministic rules across all five frameworks on both plans. No framework picker, no capability held back for a higher tier.
Deterministic throughout. Rules are authored, versioned and boolean, so the same estate always produces the same verdict.