Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Drata vs Syft

Drata logo

Drata

Cybersecurity

Agentic trust management with compliance automation.

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Syft logo

Syft

Cybersecurity

Generates a software bill of materials from images, filesystems and archives

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Syft has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Drata no published pricing for any tier; requires contacting sales team for quotes; Syft lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Drata and Syft actually diverge.

Attributes where Drata and Syft differ
AttributeDrataSyft
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelsubscriptionOpen source, no licence fee
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWeb, APImacOS, Linux, Windows, Docker

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Drata

Nothing recorded that Syft does not also cover.

Only in Syft

  • Multi-format output
  • Broad ecosystem coverage
  • Binary classifiers
  • In-toto attestations
  • Library and CLI
  • Pairs with Grype

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Drata

  • SaaS companies automating SOC 2 certification for enterprise salesnot Syft
  • Organisations managing multi-framework compliance simultaneouslynot Syft
  • Vendor management programmes requiring third-party security assessmentsnot Syft
  • Enterprises implementing AI governance and monitoring AI systemsnot Syft
  • Organisations seeking continuous compliance monitoring rather than point-in-time auditsnot Syft

Syft

  • Producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires onenot Drata
  • Feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directlynot Drata
  • Recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quicklynot Drata
  • Public sector work where an SBOM is a contractual deliverablenot Drata

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Drata

  • No published pricing for any tier; requires contacting sales team for quotes
  • Solution tiers (Startup, Growth, Enterprise) are marketing categories with no corresponding published prices or feature differentiation
  • No transparency on cost per framework, per user, or based on organisational size
  • AI questionnaire automation claims 375+ hours saved annually but does not publish per-questionnaire costs or limits
  • Compared directly with Vanta by customers, but pricing opaque for cost-benefit analysis

Syft

  • Lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
  • Fidelity varies sharply by ecosystem. Conan for C and C++, Haskell and Terraform get cataloguer support with no licence data, no dependency relationships and no file ownership, so a C and C++ shop gets the least from it.
  • Binary classification yields no licence or dependency metadata, and vendored or statically linked code is exactly where supply chain risk hides, so the blind spot and the risk overlap.
  • Incorrect CPE values and CPE collisions are recorded as open issues, and since Grype matches on CPE and PURL, an inventory error becomes a false negative in the security report downstream.
  • An inventory is not a risk assessment. Even a perfect bill of materials says a vulnerable version is present, never that the vulnerable function is called, and the triage burden lands entirely on the reader.

Pricing, plan by plan

Drata

On request
  • Startup$undefined/variable
    • 'Launch Trust Fast' with automated evidence collection
    • SOC 2 and other framework support
    • Basic compliance automation
  • Growth$undefined/variable
    • 'Accelerate Trust Smoothly' as teams expand
    • Multi-framework compliance
    • Enhanced AI automation
  • Enterprise$undefined/variable
    • 'Command Trust at Scale' for complex needs
    • Advanced GRC capabilities
    • Dedicated support

Syft

Free
  • SyftFree
    • Apache-2.0
    • No usage limits
    • Community support
  • Anchore Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Policy enforcement and reporting
    • Federal and commercial tiers
    • Pricing not published, quoted on request

Which should you pick?

Choose Drata if

  • You work on Web, API.
Drata review

Choose Syft if

  • You need multi-format output.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want broad ecosystem coverage.
Syft review

Questions people ask

Is Drata or Syft better?
Neither clearly leads. Drata starts at On request and Syft at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Drata or Syft?
Syft has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Drata and Free for Syft.
Does Drata or Syft run on more platforms?
Drata runs on Web, API. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Syft for free?
Yes. Syft has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Drata starts at On request.
What is Drata best used for?
Drata is most often used for saas companies automating soc 2 certification for enterprise sales, organisations managing multi-framework compliance simultaneously, vendor management programmes requiring third-party security assessments, enterprises implementing ai governance and monitoring ai systems. Of those, saas companies automating soc 2 certification for enterprise sales and organisations managing multi-framework compliance simultaneously are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
What can Drata do that Syft cannot?
Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Drata: What compliance frameworks does Drata support?

Drata supports multiple frameworks including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS and others, with multi-framework management capabilities.

Source
Syft: Does Syft find vulnerabilities?

No. It produces an inventory. Grype, from the same company, matches that inventory against vulnerability feeds. They are separate tools and the distinction is frequently lost.

Drata: Does Drata automate questionnaires?

Yes. Drata's AI uses approved content to draft consistent responses, automating questionnaire completion and saving claimed 375+ hours per year.

Source
Syft: Does anything in the Anchore stack do reachability analysis?

No. Neither Syft, Grype nor the commercial Anchore platform performs call graph or reachability analysis, so none of them tells you whether a vulnerable code path is actually invoked.

Drata: How many customers does Drata have?

Drata serves 8,500+ global customers ranging from startups to enterprises, with a 4.8/5.0 rating on G2.

Source
Syft: Is it a CNCF or OpenSSF project?

No. It is single-vendor open source owned by Anchore, with no foundation governance. That is a different licence risk profile from Sigstore.

Syft: What does Anchore Enterprise cost?

Not published. The pricing page is contact-sales only, with named but unpriced commercial and federal tiers.

Syft: How do I know my SBOM is complete?

You largely cannot, which is the honest answer. Silent partial parsing is a known open defect, so a bill of materials used for compliance should be spot-checked against a known dependency list.

Share

Related pages

More on Drata

More on Syft

Keep looking

Other head to heads