The comparison
| Decision factor | Vanta | Archiet | |---|---|---| | Continuous evidence collection | Excellent. Dozens of integrations, automated screenshot + log capture for SOC 2 / ISO / HIPAA. | Not its job. Vanta still owns the audit-day evidence layer. | | Greenfield code + architecture generation | None. Vanta starts with your existing app. | Designed for this. Twelve target stacks, every material decision recorded as an ADR. | | Compliance-aware code generation | Out of scope. | Architecture-first. Auth uses httpOnly cookies (CC6.1), RBAC + tenant scoping enforced at the ORM layer (CC6.2), audit log middleware on every state-changing route (CC7.2), DPIA generated from the entity model. | | Auditor-ready architecture docs | Vanta produces compliance reports. | Archiet produces architecture decision records, traceability matrices, threat models, and DPIAs alongside the code. The auditor reads both. | | Cost & timing | $7,500–$30,000+ per year, plus implementation hours. | Builder $149/mo, Pro $599/mo, Team $1,499/mo. One-shot generation, no per-seat. | | Best fit | Series A+ startups with an existing product, hiring their first compliance lead. | Founders + engineering leads building a NEW product who want compliance shipped on day one, not retrofitted in month nine. |
When Vanta wins
You already have an app in production. You're hiring a compliance lead next quarter. You need someone to walk you through SOC 2 from scratch and stay with you through the audit. Vanta is the operating system for that journey. Skip Archiet for this use case — your codebase is already there.
When Archiet wins
You're building something new. The honest version of "we'll add SOC 2 later" is "we'll rewrite it later." If compliance is a known requirement (fintech, healthtech, public-sector, regulated B2B), generating an app where the controls are designed in is cheaper than retrofitting them after Vanta tells you what's missing.
A real example: an Archiet-generated app ships with auth.universal (httpOnly cookies + JWT rotation + RBAC + workspace tenant guards) on day one. That alone covers SOC 2 CC6.1, CC6.2, CC6.3, CC6.6 and a chunk of CC7.2. Vanta will then verify those controls in production — but it doesn't write them for you.
When you'd use both
Most compliance-serious customers do. The pattern:
- Generate the architecture and codebase with Archiet. Ship the docs/ folder (ADRs + DPIA + risk assessment + traceability) into the repo.
- Connect Vanta to the running app. Vanta scans the controls Archiet baked in and starts collecting evidence.
- Audit day, the auditor reads Archiet's architecture docs (the why) plus Vanta's evidence reports (the what's running now).
The two tools are not competitive. They cover adjacent layers of the same problem.
Honest limitations
Archiet doesn't replace your compliance officer. We don't auto-collect screenshots from AWS. We don't track employee training. We don't generate the auditor's findings letter. Those are Vanta's domain.
Vanta doesn't write your code. It doesn't make architectural decisions. It doesn't populate your DPIA from the entity model. Those are Archiet's domain.
If you're shipping a regulated B2B product in 2026, the budget conversation is no longer "Vanta vs Archiet." It's "we need both, in this order."
Try Archiet free
Try free, no credit card — generate one architecture blueprint with full compliance docs, see what the docs/ folder looks like, decide if it fits your launch.