Logo Menu

Drata SOC 2 compliance software

SOC 2 compliance automation platform Last updated

Drata uses quote-based pricing rather than a published rate card; its Audit Hub gives auditors a secure in-product workspace for evidence requests, approvals, and audit communication, as described at drata.com/products/compliance/audit-hub; renewal-price growth remains a recurring criticism.

By , Lead Editor · independently researched · Methodology

Pricing
Quote-based (reported $9.6K–$60K/yr)
Source-checked frameworks
10
Integrations
300+
G2 (2026-07-24)
4.7 · 1,331 reviews
What the evidence says

Third-party procurement data (Vendr) puts observed annual contracts from about $9,649 to $60,000 with a $24,869 median. G2 rates Drata 4.7/5 across roughly 1,331 reviews (a slightly higher rating on fewer reviews than Vanta). A second, more technical limitation is the lack of native SCIM provisioning per a specialist SCIM integrator, which matters for enterprise buyers who need automated deprovisioning.

Company context

Drata has raised roughly $328M total across four rounds. The most recent confirmed round is a $200M Series C co-led by ICONIQ Growth and GGV Capital, announced December 7, 2022, valuing the company at $2B; we found no independently verified funding round after that date as of 2026-07-24.

Capabilities

What Drata does.

Seven capabilities, graded the same way for every platform in the directory. "Not established" means we looked and could not confirm it, not that the feature is missing.

CapabilityStatusEvidence
Automated evidence collection Yes Automated tests run across connected systems and map to in-scope controls. Source
Auditor workspace Yes Audit Hub centralizes auditor evidence requests and approvals; help.drata.com documents what auditors can see in the Audit Portal versus the customer view. Source
Trust center Yes Powered by SafeBase, which Drata acquired in February 2025 (drata.com/blog/acquiring-safebase); newer accounts manage it through the SafeBase-based experience per help.drata.com. Source
Security questionnaire answering Yes Current product is AI Questionnaire Assistance (AIQA); the earlier 'Security Questionnaire Automation' beta was sunset April 30, 2026 (help.drata.com), so treat older mentions of 'SQA' as superseded. Source
Enterprise admin (SSO, SCIM, RBAC) Partial SSO, RBAC, Enterprise-Grade Workspaces, and SCIM-fed group-to-role synchronization are documented. The current public evidence still does not establish full SCIM account create/deactivate lifecycle behavior, so the enterprise-admin roll-up remains partial. Source
SCIM 2.0 provisioning Not established Drata's May 2026 help article confirms an active SCIM connection can push group membership into Drata and drive automatic role assignment/revocation. It does not document full Drata user-account creation, deactivation, or reactivation. The current Okta catalogue page for Drata lists SAML rather than provisioning verbs. Record lifecycle provisioning as unknown and ask Drata in writing before treating it as enterprise-grade SCIM.
Continuous control testing Yes Drata's marketing materials use the term continuous; its Help Center documents daily control tests at 19:00 PST, with manual re-runs available at any time. Source
Native multi-framework support Partial Drata documents that multiple controls can map to a single framework requirement across its 30+ pre-built frameworks, i.e. shared/cross-mapped controls rather than confirmed fully independent native control sets per framework. Source
Source-checked frameworks

10 frameworks checked individually, and how well each is established.

A framework on a marketing page is a vendor claim, not a confirmed capability. We grade the difference rather than repeating the list.

FrameworkEvidenceNote
SOC 2 Confirmed Independently described by TechCrunch and categorized by G2 as SOC 2/compliance automation software, not only asserted on Drata's own site. Source
ISO 27001 Vendor-claimed Source
ISO 42001 Vendor-claimed Drata's April 1, 2025 Help Center overview describes automated workflows, risk tracking, continuous monitoring, policies, and evidence for ISO/IEC 42001. This records the vendor's framework support, not independently verified control depth. Source
HIPAA Vendor-claimed Source
PCI DSS Vendor-claimed Source
GDPR Vendor-claimed Source
CMMC Vendor-claimed Source
NIS2 Vendor-claimed Cited on Drata's frameworks page and repeated across 2026 third-party comparisons; not independently verified control-by-control. Source
DORA Vendor-claimed Cited on Drata's frameworks page and repeated across 2026 third-party comparisons; not independently verified control-by-control. Source
NYDFS Part 500 Vendor-claimed Announced live 2025-11-20 as a supported framework with mapped controls and reporting for the annual certification. Drata's own announcement; the mapping is not independently verified control-by-control, and the certification itself is filed by the covered entity, not issued by Drata. Source
Pricing

Drata uses quote-based pricing.

Getting a direct number requires a sales conversation. Anything below comes from reported quotes or marketplace listings, and is labeled as such.

Disclosure model
Quote-based (reported $9.6K–$60K/yr)
Sourced annual range (reported)
USD 9,649–60,000 / year
Basis
Estimate, 2026-07-24

Software pricing alone does not establish the audit fee. A licensed CPA firm issues the SOC 2 report. A commercial offer may package coordination or the fee, so get the legal provider, deliverable, and amount in writing. See the SOC 2 audit cost guide for scope and budget context.

Read the Drata pricing guide for the current source table and quote checklist.

Auditor handoff

Who actually issues the report.

Drata is not a CPA firm and does not issue the SOC 2 report itself. It automates evidence collection and continuous control monitoring and gives auditors a scoped Audit Portal view plus its own Audit Alliance directory of partner CPA firms; an independent, AICPA-accredited CPA firm performs the examination and signs the report.

Software prepares you for the audit; a licensed CPA firm performs it and issues the report. If you have not picked a firm yet, we list independent SOC 2 auditors separately, and we are not one of them.

Fit

Who Drata is for, and who it is not.

Good fit

A growing SaaS company that wants deep, well-documented connectors on a mainstream stack, values interface polish and G2-rated support experience, and plans to run more than one framework over time.

Poor fit

A buyer who wants price certainty at renewal or fully automated identity lifecycle management out of the box: independent sources (G2 reviews, Reddit, multiple pricing-comparison sites) repeatedly describe year-two renewal increases in the 10-40% range as a recurring complaint, and a third-party SCIM integrator reports Drata has no native SCIM, so user provisioning/deprovisioning at scale needs a workaround.

Typical buyer: Growth-stage SaaS companies pursuing a first SOC 2 or expanding into a multi-framework program (ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI DSS) who want a modern, developer-friendly interface..

Related profiles

Compare Drata with three alternatives.

  • Comp AI

    Engineering-led teams value inspectable or self-hosted automation.

  • A broad managed connector layer is the main constraint.

  • A formal GRC function needs one evidence layer across programs.

Source ledger

Where every figure on this page came from.

15 sources, each with what it establishes and when we read it. If a claim here is out of date, this is the list that tells you which one to re-check.

← All SOC 2 compliance software · Drata review · How we verify

For Drata

1 fact on this page we could not establish.

Everything above renders with its evidence state, so a gap is visible rather than quietly filled in. If you work at Drata, send us the sources and we will fill them.

Verification is free and always will be. It does not change where Drata appears in any list on this site, what our reviews conclude, or which platform we recommend to a buyer. We only accept a correction that comes with a source we can check ourselves, and the source is published in the ledger above alongside the date.

Correct this record