Who each option is best for, and when Acompli is deliberately narrower.
Competitor comparison
Drata vs Acompli: trust management, or privacy governance records
Drata is a trust-management and GRC platform for security compliance, continuous monitoring, audit readiness and vendor risk. Acompli is privacy-first, built around reviewed RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, vendor, risk and AI-governance records.
Drata alternativeTrust managementGRCVendor risk
Whether source records, reviewer decisions and audit history survive the workflow.
How much work it takes to implement, maintain and export the privacy record.
The questions a privacy team should ask before switching or shortlisting.
On this page
Key takeaways
- Drata and Acompli sit in different lanes: Drata is trust management, GRC, assurance and continuous compliance; Acompli is privacy governance for connected GDPR and AI-governance records.
- Drata is genuinely stronger on SOC 2, ISO and security-compliance evidence, trust-centre workflows, security questionnaires and third-party risk management.
- Acompli is stronger where the work is explicitly privacy-led: DPIA, RoPA, DSAR, privacy risk, data mapping and AI governance with review gates.
- Choose Drata for security-led audit readiness and trust operations; choose Acompli for defensible privacy governance records.
Decision workflow
From buyer question to shortlist decision
01Short answerDrata alternatives for privacy and GDPR02At a glanceDrata vs Acompli at a glance03Drata profileHow Drata describes itself04Where they are strongerWhere Drata is genuinely stronger than Acompli05Capability comparisonDrata vs Acompli, capability by capability06Ireland & UKDrata vs Acompli for RoPA in Ireland and the UK07When to choose DrataWhen Drata may still be the better fit
Source evidencelinked
Human reviewlinked
Connected recordlinked
Audit-ready outputlinked
Where strongerchecked
Best-fit buyerchecked
Capability tablechecked
Switching testchecked
01Short answer
Drata alternatives for privacy and GDPR
Acompli is a focused alternative to Drata when the buyer is not trying to replace a trust-management platform, but needs privacy-team workflows: RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, privacy risk, vendor records, data mapping and AI-governance evidence with human approval.
Drata is the stronger fit for security and compliance teams that need continuous control monitoring, SOC 2 or ISO evidence, trust documentation, security questionnaires and third-party risk management. Acompli is the better fit when the deciding question is whether GDPR records can be traced back to approved evidence and exported for the Irish DPC or UK ICO.
02At a glance
Drata vs Acompli at a glance
Published by Acompli and last reviewed on 28 June 2026. This compares operating models to help privacy teams decide - it does not claim one platform is right for every buyer.
| Decision question | Acompli | Drata |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Privacy teams that need GDPR and AI-governance records with source evidence, reviewer decisions and regulator-ready exports. | Security, compliance and trust teams that need continuous controls, audit evidence, trust documentation and third-party risk workflows. |
| Operating model | Privacy operations platform across RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, risk, vendors, data mapping, AI governance and evidence packs. | Trust management and GRC platform for continuous compliance, risk, assurance, vendor reviews, questionnaires and trust centre operations. |
| When to choose it | Choose Acompli when the buyer needs privacy records, approval workflows and Article 30 outputs rather than security-framework evidence. | Choose Drata when SOC 2, ISO 27001, continuous monitoring, audit readiness and trust operations are the primary requirement. |
03Drata profile
How Drata describes itself
Drata describes itself as an agentic trust management platform. Public product pages position it around continuous compliance, unified GRC and assurance, third-party risk management, trust documentation and security questionnaires.
Pricing signal reviewed on 29 June 2026: No list price published. Third-party data (Vendr, Costbench, June 2026): entry ~USD 7,500-USD 15,000/year (1 framework, under 50 employees); median paid ~USD 25,000/year; enterprise USD 25,000-USD 100,000+/year. Year-1 all-in including audit and implementation estimated USD 50,000-USD 120,000. Buyers should verify current scope, plan limits, implementation costs and contract terms directly with Drata.
| Signal | Details |
|---|---|
| Market lane | Trust management, security compliance automation, GRC, assurance, continuous monitoring and third-party risk management. |
| Best-fit buyer | Security, compliance and GRC teams that need SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI or similar audit evidence and customer-facing trust workflows. |
| Review / pricing signal | Capterra directory data reviewed in June 2026 showed 4.8/5 from 5 reviews and contact-vendor pricing. Verify current ratings and pricing directly before relying on them. |
| Deployment / operating model | Cloud trust-management and compliance automation platform; no self-hosted deployment was confirmed in the reviewed sources. |
04Where they are stronger
Where Drata is genuinely stronger than Acompli
A fair comparison should not treat Drata as weak because it is not privacy-first. It solves a broader security, compliance and trust problem.
- Continuous control monitoring and audit-readiness workflows for security frameworks are Drata's natural lane.
- Trust centre, security questionnaire and assurance workflows are stronger fits for Drata than for Acompli.
- Drata has dedicated third-party risk management workflows for vendor intake, evidence, criteria, decisions and follow-up.
- Drata may be the better platform where the buyer needs a security-led GRC system of record, not a privacy-specific Article 30 record.
05Capability comparison
Drata vs Acompli, capability by capability
Y means a meaningful product, module, feature or service was evidenced in public sources reviewed for this comparison. N means it was not clearly evidenced here, not proof the vendor cannot provide it.
| Capability | Acompli | Drata |
|---|---|---|
| DPIA/PIA assessments | Y | N |
| RoPA / Article 30 | Y | N |
| DSAR / privacy rights | Y | N |
| Data mapping | Y | N |
| Vendor risk | Y | Y |
| Privacy risk | Y | N |
| AI governance | Y | N |
| Consent management | N | N |
| Cookie/tracker scanning | N | N |
| Breach/incident management | N | N |
| Retention management | Y | N |
| Policy/notice management | N | Y |
| Training module | N | Y |
| Approval workflows | Y | Y |
| Audit trail | Y | Y |
| Role-based access control | Y | Y |
| Multi-entity support | Y | Y |
| Spreadsheet import | Y | N |
| PDF/CSV/Excel export | Y | Y |
| Public pricing | N | N |
06Ireland & UK
Drata vs Acompli for RoPA in Ireland and the UK
Security compliance evidence can support a privacy programme, but GDPR Article 30 requires a maintained record of processing activities. Irish and UK teams need controller and processor records, purposes, categories, recipients, transfers, retention and safeguards that can be explained to the DPC or ICO.
Acompli competes on the privacy record itself: approved assessments feed Article 30, supplier context, privacy risks and data maps, with reviewer decisions preserved for export.
- Use Drata when security control monitoring and audit evidence are the missing layer.
- Use Acompli when Article 30, DPIA, DSAR and privacy-risk outputs must be maintained as governed records.
- For many teams these tools are complementary: Drata for trust evidence, Acompli for privacy governance.
07When to choose Drata
When Drata may still be the better fit
Drata may be the better fit when the buyer is a security or compliance team trying to automate framework evidence, vendor reviews and trust documentation.
Acompli may be the better fit when the buyer is a DPO or privacy team that needs to prove the reasoning behind RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, vendor and risk decisions.
- Shortlist Acompli when stale privacy records, isolated DPIAs, supplier evidence drift or Article 30 exports are the pain.
- Shortlist Drata when the main requirement is SOC 2, ISO 27001, continuous compliance, trust centre operations or security questionnaires.
- Ask both vendors how a privacy-impacting business change becomes an approved Article 30 update.
FAQ
Common questions
Who are Drata's competitors?
Drata's closest competitors are usually trust-management and compliance automation platforms such as Vanta, Secureframe, Sprinto and Scrut. Acompli only competes when the buyer is comparing security-led GRC against privacy governance records such as RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, vendor and risk workflows.
Is Acompli a good Drata alternative?
Acompli is a good Drata alternative only when the requirement is privacy governance rather than security compliance automation. It does not replace Drata for SOC 2, ISO 27001 or trust management, but it does provide privacy workflows, approvals, evidence and Article 30 exports.
Does Acompli replace Drata?
Not for full trust-management or security GRC use cases. Acompli can replace Drata only for privacy-team workflows such as RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, vendor records, data mapping and privacy risk where source evidence and human approval matter more than security-framework breadth.
Does Drata support GDPR?
Drata can support GDPR within a broader compliance and trust programme. The comparison question is whether the buyer needs GDPR as part of security-led GRC or privacy-specific Article 30, DPIA, DSAR and risk records.
What is the best Drata alternative for privacy teams?
For privacy teams, Acompli is strongest when the target outcome is a defensible Article 30 record, DPIA, DSAR archive, privacy risk register or vendor record. Drata is stronger when the target outcome is audit readiness, security compliance evidence and trust operations.
Can Drata and Acompli work together?
Yes. Drata can manage security and trust evidence while Acompli governs the privacy record that results from business activity: assessments, Article 30 entries, risks, vendor decisions and exports.
What frameworks does Drata support?
Drata supports 26+ frameworks out of the box including SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, DORA, FedRAMP, CMMC, CCPA, ISO 27701, and NIS2. Acompli does not replicate this breadth; instead it goes deeper into the specific GDPR obligations that matter to a DPO or privacy team: Article 30 records, Article 35 DPIAs, Article 28 processor agreements, DSAR management, and EU AI Act assessments with human approval.
Is Drata worth it for a small company or startup?
Reviewers note that Drata is well-regarded for first-time SOC 2 or ISO 27001 certification and continuous monitoring but that pricing at renewal and the cost of required external audits make the first-year total higher than the software price alone. Acompli is not a substitute for SOC 2 or ISO 27001 automation; it addresses a different job - maintaining GDPR privacy records, DPIA, DSAR, and AI governance workflows - and is targeted at privacy teams and DPOs rather than security compliance teams.
How much does Drata cost?
Drata does not publish list prices. Third-party procurement data (Vendr, Costbench, June 2026) shows entry pricing around USD 7,500-USD 15,000/year for one framework and fewer than 50 employees, a median paid contract of approximately USD 25,000/year, and enterprise deals running to USD 100,000+/year. Year-1 all-in cost including audit fees and implementation typically reaches USD 50,000-USD 120,000. Neither Drata nor Acompli publish list prices; Acompli is built for privacy teams and is a different purchase than compliance automation.
Connected workflows
Related Acompli modules
Risk management
Extract candidate risks from approved evidence, assign treatment plans and report on current exposure.
Open moduleThird-party risk
Record suppliers and processors once, then reference them across assessments, RoPA, risk and data mapping.
Open moduleRoPA management
Maintain Article 30 records that stay linked to approved assessments, systems, suppliers and transfers.
Open moduleAssessments
Run DPIAs, LIAs, TIAs, processor reviews and AI Act assessments with templates, AI support and human approval.
Open moduleCompare Drata against the workflow you need to defend.
Bring one security audit-control workflow and one GDPR record workflow so the trust-management and privacy-governance jobs are clear.