Compare · Open-source compliance
Screenata vs Comp AI
Comp AI (from Bubba AI) is an open-source, AI-native compliance platform, AGPL-licensed and self-hostable, positioned as an open alternative to Vanta and Drata. Both Comp AI and Screenata are AI-native, so the difference isn't "AI or not." It's the model: Screenata is a managed service with transparent flat per-framework pricing, policies written deterministically from infrastructure scans, and every claim traced to a signed, externally-verifiable artifact, rather than an open-source toolkit you self-host or run on a managed quote.
Side by side
Screenata and Comp AI, line by line.
Where Screenata is different
Three things Comp AI doesn’t do.
Managed from day one, not self-host DIY
Comp AI's free path is self-hosting the open-source code: you deploy, operate, and maintain it on your own infrastructure. Screenata is managed from day one, Vera runs the program for you, with no infrastructure to stand up or keep running.
Deterministic policies and a signed proof chain
Both are AI-native. Screenata writes policies deterministically from infrastructure scans and traces each claim to a control test and a cryptographically signed artifact an auditor can verify outside the platform, a verifiable chain, not just AI-drafted documents and collection automations.
Transparent flat pricing
$499/month per framework, published, versus a free-but-DIY open-source tier or a managed plan priced by quote.
The operational layer
Both automate. Screenata is managed and signs the evidence.
Detect
Scheduled agents scan your cloud, repos, and identity provider continuously, the same signals Comp AI reads.
Do
Vera collects ~70% of evidence automatically across 500+ checks, chases the attestations a dashboard can't, and when she finds a gap she opens the remediation ticket and drafts the fix.
Verify & sign
After a human applies the change, Vera re-verifies and files a signed, traceable artifact. She escalates judgment calls rather than acting unattended, which is what keeps auditors comfortable.
Comp AI
AI collect (self-hosted) → you operate it
Screenata
Detect → collect & remediate → re-verify → sign
Comp AI, in detail
The questions people ask about Comp AI.
Open source
Open-source and self-hostable, what that means
Comp AI's code is AGPL-licensed and on GitHub, and you can self-host it for free on your own infrastructure, a genuine advantage if you want to inspect the tooling or keep data on infra you control. The trade-off is that self-hosting is DIY: you deploy, operate, and maintain it, and back up your own evidence. Comp AI's done-for-you path is a separate managed plan priced by quote. Screenata is managed from day one at a flat $499/month per framework, with no infrastructure to run and its evidence-verification spec published so you can validate any signed artifact outside the platform.
The honest version
When Comp AI is the better fit.
- You want open-source compliance tooling you can read, audit, or self-host
- You'd rather keep compliance data on infrastructure you control
- You want a low-cost, open alternative to Vanta and Drata with the audit bundled
Screenata is built for the 5–50 person team that needs SOC 2 to close a deal, wants policies grounded in real infrastructure, and would rather operate compliance from Slack and the terminal than a dashboard. More on who we’re for.
Screenata
$499/month per framework, managed
One plan, everything included. SOC 2 + HIPAA, all integrations, all agent operations. Cancel anytime.
Comp AI
Free self-host (open source); managed by quote
Typical GRC platform model: annual commitment, with additional frameworks and headcount priced on top.
Questions
Screenata vs Comp AI, answered.
Is Screenata a good Comp AI alternative?
It depends on whether you want open-source tooling or a managed service. Comp AI is an open-source, AI-native compliance platform you can self-host for free (AGPL) or run as a quote-priced managed plan. Screenata is a managed service at $499/month per framework, with deterministic policies from your infrastructure and signed, verifiable evidence. If you want to self-host and inspect the code, Comp AI fits; if you want the program run for you at a transparent flat price, Screenata does.
Is Comp AI really open source, and is Screenata?
Comp AI's platform is open source (AGPL-3.0) and self-hostable. Screenata is a managed SaaS, not open source, though its evidence-verification spec and CLI are open, so anyone can validate a signed artifact outside the platform. The two take different open positions: Comp AI opens the code you run; Screenata opens the evidence you produce.
How much does Comp AI cost compared to Screenata?
Comp AI's open-source code is free to self-host (you run your own infrastructure); its managed plan is priced by quote, with no public rate card. Screenata is $499/month per framework, published and flat, managed, month to month.
How is Screenata different from Comp AI if both use AI?
The difference isn't AI versus no-AI, both are AI-native. Screenata writes policies deterministically from infrastructure scans and traces each claim to a control test and a cryptographically signed artifact, a verifiable chain. Comp AI leans on AI policy editing and prompt-built collection automations. And Screenata is managed at a flat per-framework price, versus self-host-DIY or a managed quote.
Connect and see
Compare on your own systems, not a feature grid.
Connect GitHub and cloud read-only. Vera generates policies and a control matrix from your real infrastructure in minutes, and we ship new capabilities every week.