Drata vs Attevera for the EU AI Act

Drata and Attevera overlap on three words — EU AI Act — and diverge on almost everything else about how they get there. Here is the honest split, based on each vendor's own materials.

Updated July 17, 2026 · Informational guidance, not legal advice

What each tool is

Drata is a horizontal compliance automation platform: continuous, integration-driven monitoring and evidence across SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, and — per its own materials — more than thirty pre-mapped frameworks, including ISO 42001 and the EU AI Act. Drata has built out an AI governance surface of its own: an ISO 42001 module, a public Trust Center, and an AI Agent Governance product it describes as discovering AI agents in your environment and enforcing policies on their actions. Drata itself holds ISO 42001 certification.

Attevera does one job: the EU AI Act operating record for deployers and product teams. AI system register, Article 5 and 6(3)/Annex III classification with written reasoning, obligations mapped per article, owner-assigned controls, evidence with 90-day staleness flags, FRIA and Article 73 incident workflows, and a signed monthly review — with public pricing and a self-serve trial, aimed at mid-market teams rather than enterprise compliance programs.

Accuracy note

This comparison relies on each vendor's own public materials as of July 2026. Drata ships quickly and its catalog changes; if anything here is stale, tell us at support@attevera.com and we will correct it. Attevera is not affiliated with Drata.

The honest differences

  • Framework catalog vs single regulation: in Drata, the EU AI Act is one of 30+ frameworks operationalized through a control-centric structure. In Attevera, the Act is the whole product — the mechanics regulators actually ask about (classification reasoning, role determination, deployer duties, incident deadlines) are product features, not mapped controls.
  • Agent governance vs system record: Drata's AI Agent Governance watches AI agents acting in your environment and enforces policy at runtime. Attevera does not do runtime enforcement; it operates the governance record about your AI systems. Different layers — one is control plane, the other is the record of obligations and proof.
  • Evidence model: Drata leads with continuous automated evidence via integrations; Attevera's record is human-operated with product-enforced rhythm (staleness flags, review sign-offs, append-only audit trail).
  • Buying motion and audience: Drata is sales-led with unpublished pricing, strongest where an enterprise compliance function runs many frameworks. Attevera publishes pricing from €49/month billed yearly, self-serve, and scopes deliberately to deployers and product teams — GPAI foundation-model provider obligations (Articles 51–56) are explicitly out of scope.

Which one you need

  • You run (or need) a multi-framework compliance program — SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 42001 — and want the AI Act inside that machine: Drata is built for exactly that consolidation.
  • Your question is narrower and sharper — which of our AI systems does the Act capture, what do we owe per system, who owns it, and what proof exists: that per-system record is Attevera's entire product.
  • You need runtime control over AI agents' actions: that is a control-plane problem; Drata is building there, Attevera deliberately is not.
  • You already have Drata and the AI Act asks keep getting deeper than a control checklist: the common pairing is the certification program in Drata and the AI-Act-native record in Attevera, with exports from one serving as evidence in the other.

Start the AI Act record this week

Self-serve, public pricing, 14-day trial without a card — register one system, classify it, and see what the packet looks like.

See Attevera pricing

Frequently asked questions

Do Drata and Attevera compete?

At the edges. If your only need is an EU AI Act checkbox inside an existing multi-framework program, Drata's catalog may cover it. If your need is the per-system AI Act record — classifications with reasoning, obligation maps, incident clocks — that is specialist ground. Many teams run both without overlap pain.

Does Attevera cover ISO 42001 like Drata does?

No. Attevera's register, controls, evidence ledger, and review cadence are reusable source material for an ISO 42001 program, but Attevera does not certify, audit, or manage ISO 42001 itself. If certification is the goal, use a platform built for it.

Which is cheaper?

Attevera's pricing is public — from €49/month billed yearly. Drata's is quoted through sales and not published on its site, so we cite no numbers for it; get a quote for your scope and compare directly.

Will either tool make us compliant with the EU AI Act?

No — no vendor can. Drata describes automating compliance workflows; Attevera prepares an audit-ready operating record. In both cases the compliance determination belongs to your auditors, counsel, and regulators. This page is informational guidance, not legal advice.

Keep reading