Where we fit
Keep your platform.
Add proof.
Autopliance is the evidence layer underneath the compliance platform you already run. Most of our users keep theirs, and we would rather they did.
Keep your compliance platform
Vanta, Drata, Secureframe and Sprinto automate the work of compliance — collecting states, running tests, managing policies, chasing questionnaires. They do that well, and we are not trying to replace them.
Integration breadth, policy management, questionnaire automation and auditor relationships are real strengths, and they are theirs. Those platforms are worth what they cost because they solve a real problem.
Add the part they cannot do
Their artifact is something your auditor has to trust. Ours is something your auditor can check — cryptographically, independently, without our cooperation.
That is an architectural difference, not a feature gap. It is not something a release closes.
A compliance platform tells you a control exists. Autopliance proves it ran.
Why this is additive, not a migration
You are not being asked to rip anything out, run a bake-off, or retrain a team. The platform you already defend internally keeps doing its job. Autopliance produces the artifact that job cannot produce, and the two do not overlap.
There is a second reason worth knowing about, and it has nothing to do with architecture: no US compliance platform supports Julkri, Katakri or Pitukri. If any of the three is on your desk, that is not a comparison between vendors — it is the difference between having tooling and not having it.
Honest about the overlap
If what you need is integration breadth, a policy engine or questionnaire automation, use one of the established platforms — genuinely. We do not build those and do not intend to.
We also do not have auditor relationships and do not deliver audits. We produce the material an auditor forms an opinion from; forming the opinion is somebody else's job, and it should be.