ComplyJet vs Comp AI vs Screenata

ComplyJet and Comp AI both target startups that find Vanta and Drata too expensive, but they take opposite routes to "cheap." ComplyJet is a closed, low-cost SaaS with published flat pricing, from $5,000/year per framework, capped at 50 employees, audits excluded, so you pay a known sticker and someone else hosts it. Comp AI (entity Bubba AI) is open-source under AGPL-3.0 and self-hostable: free if you deploy and operate it yourself, AI-native, with a quote-based managed plan on top. The axis is closed, priced, hosted-for-you versus open, free-if-you-run-it, DIY.

ComplyJet wins on zero-effort setup and predictability: a published price and nothing to deploy suit a small team that just wants SOC 2 started without infrastructure work. Comp AI wins on control and inspectability, open-source (AGPL) code you can read, fork, and self-host appeals to engineering teams that want to own their stack or avoid per-seat SaaS fees, with AI-native policy editing and prompt-to-automation evidence. The tradeoff is convenience-and-a-known-price versus freedom-and-ownership-at-the-cost-of-running-it-yourself; the managed Comp AI plan trades that DIY burden for a quote.

Screenata is the managed, agent-first middle path with transparent pricing. Vera reads your infrastructure, writes policies deterministically from real config, and drives roughly 70% of evidence into cryptographically signed, timestamped artifacts verifiable outside the platform, no servers for you to run, no quote to negotiate. Pick ComplyJet for the lowest published, no-setup price on one framework, Comp AI if you want open-source tooling to inspect or self-host, and Screenata if you'd rather an agent operate SOC 2 or HIPAA from day one at $499/month per framework, month to month.