RoPA supplier comparison

RoPA software suppliers: Article 30 register tools compared

A useful RoPA tool keeps processing records current as assessments, suppliers, systems, transfers and purposes change.

Explore RoPA Import your current RoPA

RoPAArticle 30Controller recordsProcessor records

Fit

Who each option is best for, and where either supplier is deliberately narrower.

Evidence

Which public claims, review signals, caveats and capability rows are evidenced.

Operations

How much work it takes to implement, maintain and export the privacy record.

Decision

The questions a privacy team should ask before switching or shortlisting.

On this page

01Honest fit

Where Acompli belongs in this comparison

Acompli belongs in the shortlist where the buyer needs Article 30 records that are imported, reviewed, entity-scoped and maintained from assessment and supplier evidence.

The supplier lists below are intentionally honest: some tools are stronger than Acompli for a specific service, especially consent, cookie scanning, breach workflow, policy management and training.

Comparison row	Acompli position	Supplier check
RoPA / Article 30	Y	Check controller and processor record support.
Multi-entity support	Y	Verify group/entity scoping and per-entity exports.
Spreadsheet import	Y	Ask how existing Excel/CSV registers are mapped and reviewed.
PDF/CSV/Excel export	Y	Require regulator-readable exports without a platform login.

02Supplier set

Suppliers to compare for RoPA software

Use this table to compare service-specific suppliers. Confirm exact claims, ratings and pricing against current vendor or directory sources before relying on them.

Supplier	Market lane	Public strength	Comparison note
Acompli	Privacy operations platform	Assessment-fed Article 30 records with review gates.	Strong where RoPA must stay current from approved work.
OneTrust	Enterprise privacy suite	Broad privacy automation and RoPA capability.	Strong enterprise incumbent.
GDPR Register	GDPR compliance platform	RoPA, DPIA, LIA, vendors, risk and AI Act.	Direct GDPR register competitor.
EQS	EU governance infrastructure	Privacy Cockpit and RoPA language.	Broader compliance provider.
Symbiant	UK GRC platform	ROPA software with UK GDPR field language.	Useful UK comparison.
Dapian	UK data protection software	IAR and RoPA module.	UK public-sector relevant.
TrustArc	Enterprise privacy platform	RoPA acceleration and data mapping/risk manager language.	Established privacy suite.
TrustWorks	Privacy and AI governance	AI-assisted RoPA and privacy-management workflows.	Modern direct competitor.
HoundDog.ai	Privacy code scanner	Code-backed RoPA edits.	Strong technical evidence angle.
Privado AI	Privacy code scanning	RoPA populated from code and data maps.	Engineering-led evidence.
Vanta	Trust automation	GDPR/privacy workflows inside compliance automation.	Verify Article 30 depth.
Responsum	EU privacy platform	Full privacy compliance platform with RoPA coverage.	Broad EU workflow coverage.

03Buyer checks

Buyer checks for this category

Separate Article 30 controller and processor records.
Include rows for imports, evidence linkage, review gates, version history and entity-scoped exports.
Ask every supplier to show what happens when a DPIA changes the lawful basis, retention period or transfer route.

04Fair comparison

Keep the page useful and fair

Show rating plus review count plus source when review data is used.
Use the vendor's own language for its strongest fit before introducing the Acompli comparison.
Show Acompli clearly where it does not provide the service; do not stretch adjacent workflow features into a yes.
Confirm vendor pricing and review directory data against current sources.

Comparison FAQ

RoPA questions answered

What is the best Article 30 RoPA software?

The best RoPA software separates controller and processor records, supports multi-entity scoping, and keeps fields linked to the assessments and supplier evidence that change them. Enterprise suites like OneTrust and TrustArc offer broad RoPA coverage; UK-focused tools like Dapian and Symbiant fit UK-specific field language.

Do I need separate controller and processor records?

Yes - GDPR Article 30 requires a controller record under 30(1) and a processor record under 30(2), and they capture different information. A tool that only models one record type cannot represent an organisation acting as both controller and processor for different activities.

Can RoPA software handle multiple legal entities?

Check for multi-entity or group scoping and per-entity exports specifically - a register that only exports as one undifferentiated document cannot let each subsidiary answer its own supervisory authority independently.

Acompli overlap

Related Acompli workflows

RoPA management

Maintain Article 30 records that stay linked to approved assessments, systems, suppliers and transfers.

Open module

Assessments

Run DPIAs, LIAs, TIAs, processor reviews and AI Act assessments with templates, AI support and human approval.

Open module

Data mapping

Build a living view of systems, suppliers, locations, data categories and transfers.

Open module

Third-party risk

Record suppliers and processors once, then reference them across assessments, RoPA, risk and data mapping.

Open module

Compare RoPA software against the record you need to defend.

Bring one real workflow and compare suppliers by the evidence, approvals, exports and maintenance burden they create.

Explore RoPA Import your current RoPA

Acompli architecture

One governed foundation. Five connected modules.

Imported systems, suppliers, policies, DPIAs and RoPA spreadsheets become the shared evidence model for assessments, risk, records, third-party oversight and data mapping.

Point tools create records. Acompli connects them.