Who each option is best for, and where either supplier is deliberately narrower.
Vendor comparison
Osano vs Securiti: capability comparison
A side-by-side comparison of Osano and Securiti across RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, vendor risk, AI governance and evidence workflows - with Acompli shown as a focused, human-approved, evidence-traceable alternative to both for Ireland, UK and EU teams.
OsanoSecuritiComparisonAcompli alternative
Which public claims, review signals, caveats and capability rows are evidenced.
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
- Osano and Securiti are compared here on public, evidence-framed capability coverage: Osano is evidenced for 14 of 20 tracked capabilities, Securiti for 17.
- The clearest differences: Osano adds Public pricing; Securiti adds Privacy risk, AI governance, Breach/incident management, Retention management.
- Acompli is the focused third option: connected RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, risk, vendor and AI-governance records, each human-approved and traceable to its source evidence, built around GDPR Article 30, the Irish DPC and the UK ICO.
- "Y" means publicly evidenced in the reviewed sources, "N" means not clearly evidenced here (not proof a vendor cannot provide it). Verify live scope, pricing and exports with each vendor.
Comparison workflow
From company profile to shortlist decision
01Short answerOsano vs Securiti02At a glanceOsano vs Securiti vs Acompli at a glance03Capability comparisonOsano vs Securiti: capability by capability04Where each is strongerOsano vs Securiti: the differences that matter05Shortlisting notesChoosing between Osano, Securiti and Acompli06Ireland & UKOsano vs Securiti for RoPA in Ireland and the UK
Market lanechecked
Best-fit buyerchecked
Public strengthschecked
Capability evidencechecked
Overlapchecked
Gapschecked
Exportschecked
Shortlist fitchecked
01Short answer
Osano vs Securiti
Osano is positioned as: All-in-one privacy management, cookie consent, consent preferences, subject rights, data mapping, vendor privacy and assessments. Securiti is positioned as: Enterprise DataAI command platform: DSPM, data discovery, data security, privacy automation, consent, breach, data governance and AI security.
For an Irish, UK or EU privacy team weighing Osano against Securiti, Acompli is the focused alternative to both: it keeps RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, risk, vendor and AI-governance records connected and defensible, with every record human-approved and every Article 30 field traceable to the assessment that produced it.
Published by Acompli and last reviewed on 29 June 2026. Capability coverage below is evidence-framed from public sources for all three.
02At a glance
Osano vs Securiti vs Acompli at a glance
| Decision question | Osano | Securiti | Acompli |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best fit | Privacy teams that need an all-in-one data privacy platform with consent, subject rights, data mapping, vendor privacy, assessments and privacy templates | Large enterprises that need data discovery, classification, security posture, AI security, privacy automation, consent and breach workflows at scale | DPO-led privacy teams that need connected GDPR and AI-governance records with human review, source evidence and regulator-ready exports |
| Operating model | Unified privacy management platform spanning cookie consent, consent and preferences, subject rights, data mapping, vendor privacy, assessments and TrustHub | DataAI command platform combining DSPM, data discovery, data governance, privacy automation, consent, breach and AI security | Evidence-led privacy operations across RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, risk, vendors, data mapping, AI governance and code scan |
| When to choose it | Choose Osano when cookie consent, preferences, subject rights and vendor privacy scoring are central to the programme | Choose Securiti when data security, discovery, consent, breach and AI controls are part of the same enterprise requirement | Choose Acompli when Article 30 continuity, evidence provenance, human approval and Ireland/UK governance depth matter more than consent operations |
03Capability comparison
Osano vs Securiti: capability by capability
Each capability is marked Y (publicly evidenced in the reviewed sources) or N (not clearly evidenced here, which is not proof the vendor cannot provide it). Acompli is shown in the final column.
| Capability | Osano | Securiti | Acompli |
|---|---|---|---|
| DPIA/PIA assessments | Y | Y | Y |
| RoPA / Article 30 | Y | Y | Y |
| DSAR / privacy rights | Y | Y | Y |
| Data mapping | Y | Y | Y |
| Vendor risk | Y | Y | Y |
| Privacy risk | N | Y | Y |
| AI governance | N | Y | Y |
| Consent management | Y | Y | N |
| Cookie/tracker scanning | Y | Y | N |
| Breach/incident management | N | Y | N |
| Retention management | N | Y | Y |
| Policy/notice management | Y | Y | N |
| Training module | N | N | N |
| Approval workflows | Y | Y | Y |
| Audit trail | Y | Y | Y |
| Role-based access control | Y | Y | Y |
| Multi-entity support | Y | Y | Y |
| Spreadsheet import | N | N | Y |
| PDF/CSV/Excel export | Y | Y | Y |
| Public pricing | Y | N | N |
04Where each is stronger
Osano vs Securiti: the differences that matter
On the tracked capabilities, Osano and Securiti overlap heavily; the decision usually turns on the handful of capabilities only one of them evidences, plus depth, jurisdiction fit and price.
- Only Osano (not Securiti) is evidenced for: Public pricing.
- Only Securiti (not Osano) is evidenced for: Privacy risk, AI governance, Breach/incident management, Retention management.
- Acompli's wedge versus both: assessment-fed, evidence-traceable records (every Article 30 field links back to the approved assessment that produced it), human approval on every record, and a per-entity export the DPC or ICO can read without a platform login.
05Shortlisting notes
Choosing between Osano, Securiti and Acompli
Osano and Securiti should each be assessed on their published fit above. Acompli belongs on the shortlist where the priority is connected, defensible privacy records that stay current between audits, with a short route from draft to reviewed decision.
- Shortlist Osano or Securiti where their broader suite, integrations or specific modules match the programme you want to run.
- Shortlist Acompli where the pain is stale RoPA fields, isolated DPIAs, disconnected DSAR files, supplier evidence drift, or risk registers that do not trace back to source evidence.
- Ask all three to demonstrate the same workflow end to end: a new processing activity, its assessment, the RoPA update, supplier evidence, the privacy risk and an exportable audit trail.
06Ireland & UK
Osano vs Securiti for RoPA in Ireland and the UK
Records of processing activities are required under GDPR Article 30 - a controller record under Article 30(1) and a separate processor record under Article 30(2). In Ireland the Data Protection Commission (DPC) publishes Article 30 guidance; in the UK the ICO sets out what must be documented under UK GDPR.
Whichever of Osano or Securiti you weigh, the question for an Irish or UK team is the depth of the Article 30 record and how defensibly it exports. Acompli's difference is provenance: every Article 30 field traces back to the approved assessment that produced it, and each legal entity gets a self-contained export the DPC or ICO can read without logging in.
- GDPR Article 30(1) and 30(2) - controller and processor records modelled separately, scoped by legal entity.
- DPC (Ireland) and ICO (UK) Article 30 documentation, with EU and UK GDPR distinguished on one register.
- Per-entity, self-contained export so each subsidiary can answer its own supervisory authority.
Acompli answers
Acompli: the focused alternative to both
Is Acompli an alternative to both Osano and Securiti?
Acompli is a focused alternative to both Osano and Securiti for teams that want connected, evidence-traceable RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, risk, vendor and AI-governance records rather than the broadest feature set. Every record is human-approved and every Article 30 field traces back to the approved assessment that produced it, built around GDPR Article 30, the Irish DPC and the UK ICO.
Osano vs Securiti: which is better for Irish and UK GDPR?
For Irish and UK GDPR the deciding factors are Article 30(1)/(2) coverage, DPC and ICO fit, and a self-contained per-entity export - so the better choice between Osano and Securiti is the one that documents both controller and processor records and exports them defensibly. Acompli is built specifically around that: EU and UK GDPR distinguished on one register, every field evidence-linked, and an export the DPC or ICO can read without a platform login.
What should I compare when choosing between Osano and Securiti?
Compare Osano and Securiti on one real workflow end to end: a new processing activity, its assessment, the resulting Article 30 RoPA update, the supplier evidence, the privacy risk entry and an exportable audit trail. Whether each value is evidenced (the capability table above) matters less than whether the records stay connected and defensible after approval - which is the test Acompli is designed to pass.
Acompli overlap
Related Acompli workflows
Osano vs Acompli
Compare Osano directly with Acompli across RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, risk and vendor records.
Open moduleSecuriti vs Acompli
Compare Securiti directly with Acompli across RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, risk and vendor records.
Open moduleAssessments
Run DPIAs, LIAs, TIAs, processor reviews and AI Act assessments with templates, AI support and human approval.
Open moduleDSAR management
Manage requests from intake to archive with deadlines, identity checks, redaction and audit history.
Open moduleCompare Osano, Securiti and Acompli against a real workflow.
Bring one RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, vendor, risk or AI-governance requirement and map which parts Osano covers, which Securiti covers, and where Acompli keeps the evidence connected and defensible.