Sectum AI vs Drata

TL;DR. These products solve different problems. Drata is one of the two leading compliance-automation platforms (the other being Vanta) — it centralizes evidence, automates control monitoring, and streamlines audit readiness across SOC 2 / ISO 27001 / HIPAA / GDPR / NIST AI / 18+ frameworks. It cannot produce AI-specific multi-tenant isolation evidence — that’s not what it’s built for. Sectum AI produces exactly that evidence, cryptographically attested, mapped per-finding to the same controls Drata tracks. Sectum AI is a Drata complement, mirroring the Vanta-complement story: Drata is the evidence-aggregation layer, Sectum AI is the AI-isolation evidence-production layer.

The two products

Drata (drata.com)

Category: GRC / compliance automation. Centralizes evidence, automates control monitoring, streamlines audit readiness.

Pricing (Drata Pricing 2026 — CostBench, SOC2 Auditors):

Foundation: ~$7,500-$10,000 / year.
Mid-size (50-200 employees, SOC 2 Type II): $20,000-$45,000 / year.
Enterprise: $25,000-$100,000+ / year.
Custom-quoted on headcount, frameworks, modules. Not publicly listed.

Framework coverage (broader than Vanta’s headline list): SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, GDPR, PCI DSS, CCPA, CCM, CMMC, ISO 27701, ISO 27017, ISO 27018, Cyber Essentials, Microsoft SSPA, NIST 800-53, NIST CSF, NIST AI, NIST 800-171, FFIEC, custom frameworks.

Capability: Direct integrations with cloud infrastructure, identity providers, HR systems, code repositories, ticketing tools — auto-collect evidence + auto-map to controls. Continuous control monitoring + audit readiness + customer trust posture.

Buyer: SaaS startups and mid-market preparing for SOC 2 / ISO 27001. Direct rivalry with Vanta and Secureframe.

Sectum AI (sectum.ai)

Category: multi-tenant AI verification — produces auditor-acceptable, tamper-evident, control-mapped evidence that the tenant boundary holds across an AI stack.

License: Apache 2.0 OSS core. Sectum Cloud commercial. The evidence layer in the OSS produces the same artifacts the hosted product does — by design.

Relevant offerings:

SOC 2 Tenant Isolation Evidence Pack — curated, control-mapped pack sold direct and through audit-firm partners.
Erasure Attestation — GDPR Article 17 attestation for a churned tenant.
Continuous Multi-Tenant Verification — Sectum Cloud subscription tiers.
Open Sectum (OSS) — free.

See pricing for current rates.

Same story as Vanta — different layers, complementary

	Drata	Sectum AI
Role	Compliance automation / evidence aggregator	AI verification / evidence producer
Layer	Above the technical stack	Inside the AI portion of the technical stack
Output	A continuously-maintained trust posture + framework attestations	A signed, control-mapped audit pack for a specific multi-tenant AI run
Frameworks	SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI, GDPR, NIST AI, 18+	OWASP LLM Top 10 + NIST AI RMF + MITRE ATLAS — per-finding, mapped to the SOC 2 / ISO 27001 / GDPR / EU AI Act / HIPAA control rows the auditor cares about
Trust signal	Continuous monitoring + control-test attestations	Cryptographic proof (Rekor + TSA + in-toto), independently verifiable
AI-specific coverage	NIST AI framework checks at the control level	11 attack classes + GDPR Art. 17 erasure across all 7 configured surfaces
For	Compliance and security ops	CISOs, DPOs, audit firms

The pattern is the same as the Sectum AI vs Vanta story: Drata is one of the two leaders in compliance automation, and Sectum AI sits next to both. The relationship is vertical — Drata is the evidence-aggregation layer; Sectum AI is the AI-isolation evidence-production layer. They stack; they don’t substitute.

Drata’s NIST AI support — and where Sectum AI picks up

Drata is notable for supporting NIST AI as a framework. That helps customers track NIST AI RMF controls at the platform / org level. But:

Drata’s NIST AI support is control-level — checking that the organization has policies, documentation, and processes aligned with NIST AI RMF.
It doesn’t produce per-finding evidence that a specific multi-tenant AI run was clean across surfaces. That’s a different shape of evidence.
Sectum AI maps every finding to NIST AI RMF MEASURE 2.7 (security/resilience measurement) — a per-finding mapping that lives in the audit-pack PDF and in evidence.json.

For a Drata customer running SOC 2 + NIST AI on a multi-tenant AI product, Sectum AI is the AI-specific evidence producer that fills the per-finding-measurement gap.

The SOC 2 Tenant Isolation Evidence Pack

The Sectum AI SOC 2 Tenant Isolation Evidence Pack is designed to plug into a Drata-driven (or Vanta-driven, or Secureframe-driven) audit:

A pre-curated, control-mapped pack covering SOC 2 CC6.x and the equivalent ISO 27001, HIPAA, EU AI Act mappings.
Per-finding owasp_llm + atlas[] + nist[] IDs.
Run once per audit cycle; delivered to the audit firm and the customer.
Available direct or through audit firms reselling to their clients — the audit firm can include it as the AI-isolation evidence source.
Verifies under sectum-ai verify — the auditor doesn’t need to trust Sectum AI; they verify the chain themselves.

The customer’s experience: one platform (Drata) for the compliance posture, one cryptographic pack (Sectum AI) for the AI-isolation portion.

Where each is the right tool

Use Drata when you need to

Centralize compliance evidence across cloud / identity / HR / code systems.
Cover 18+ frameworks (SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI, GDPR, NIST family, custom).
Maintain a continuously-monitored trust posture and customer-facing trust page.
Run a continuous SOC 2 program with control-drift alerting.
Work with auditors through a single managed platform.

Use Sectum AI when you need to

Prove the multi-tenant boundary on an AI product to an auditor, a DPO, or a customer security review.
Verify GDPR Article 17 erasure across every AI surface for a churned tenant.
Hand a customer a cryptographically-attestable, independently-verifiable evidence pack — verifiable with sectum-ai verify without Sectum AI in the room.
Get per-finding control mappings (OWASP / ATLAS / NIST AI) into your audit evidence rather than control-level attestations alone.
Run on an open-source evidence layer that doesn’t depend on a single vendor’s continued operation.

Honest positioning

Drata is a strong compliance-automation platform — one of the two market leaders, with deep framework coverage and a maturing AI-control story (NIST AI). Sectum AI is the AI-isolation evidence producer — Drata-grade evidence aggregation doesn’t substitute for cryptographic per-finding attestation, and Sectum AI doesn’t aim to be a GRC platform. The two are complements, mirroring the Vanta-Sectum AI story exactly.

Pricing

Drata — $7.5K-$100K+ / year depending on plan (Foundation / Mid-size / Enterprise) + headcount + add-ons. Not publicly listed. See Drata plans.
Open Sectum (OSS) — free, Apache 2.0.
Sectum Cloud — see pricing.

References

Drata — SOC 2 product, Plans, Pricing 2026 (CostBench), Pricing breakdown (SOC2 Auditors), Review + alternatives (SecureLeap), G2 reviews.
Sectum AI — GitHub, docs, compliance mappings, sample evidence packs.
Related Sectum AI comparison: Sectum AI vs Vanta — same story, the other compliance-automation leader.