Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

MetricStream vs Soketi

MetricStream logo

MetricStream

Cybersecurity

Enterprise GRC suite for large regulated organisations, with implementation costs that exceed the licence

From
On request
Free plan
No
Full reviewWebsite
Soketi logo

Soketi

Developer Tools

Self-hosted, Pusher-compatible WebSockets server with a stalled maintenance record

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Soketi has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: MetricStream implementation typically costs one and a half to two and a half times the first year licence, so a one million dollar licence carries a one and a half to two and a half million dollar rollout that rarely appears in the initial business case.; Soketi maintenance has effectively stalled: the maintainer has said time is severely limited, releases are infrequent, and the community has been discussing whether the project is abandoned, which means security fixes may not arrive.
  • They diverge on capability: MetricStream covers Enterprise and operational risk, Soketi covers Pusher protocol compatibility.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which MetricStream and Soketi actually diverge.

Attributes where MetricStream and Soketi differ
AttributeMetricStreamSoketi
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquoteOpen source, no licence fee
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWebLinux, macOS, Windows
CategoryCybersecurityDeveloper Tools

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

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 MetricStream

  • Enterprise and operational risk
  • Regulatory compliance
  • Internal audit
  • Third-party risk
  • Cyber risk quantification
  • Policy and case management
  • Content libraries
  • ESG reporting

Only in Soketi

  • Pusher protocol compatibility
  • Presence and private channels
  • Horizontal scaling
  • App management backends
  • Webhooks
  • Prometheus metrics

What people use each for

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

MetricStream

  • A multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examinersnot Soketi
  • An insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the boardnot Soketi
  • A pharmaceutical company that must track regulatory change across jurisdictions and show what each change affectednot Soketi
  • An organisation whose three lines of defence must share one risk taxonomy rather than three overlapping spreadsheetsnot Soketi

Soketi

  • A Laravel application that already uses Echo and wants to stop paying a hosted realtime providernot MetricStream
  • Realtime notifications or presence indicators where data must not leave your own infrastructure for compliance reasonsnot MetricStream
  • A local or CI environment that needs a Pusher-compatible server without hitting a paid accountnot MetricStream
  • A high-connection-count application where hosted per-connection pricing has become the largest line in the infrastructure billnot MetricStream

Where each one falls short

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

MetricStream

  • Implementation typically costs one and a half to two and a half times the first year licence, so a one million dollar licence carries a one and a half to two and a half million dollar rollout that rarely appears in the initial business case.
  • Full deployment takes six to eighteen months, during which the organisation runs old and new processes in parallel and the promised efficiency gain is negative.
  • Per-user pricing in the low thousands per year per seat discourages giving access to the first line of defence, which is precisely where risk data originates, so many deployments end up with data still arriving by spreadsheet.
  • Configuration flexibility comes at the price of specialist skills, and organisations become dependent on MetricStream partners or a small internal team, making later changes slow and expensive.
  • The interface and workflow feel enterprise-heavy next to modern compliance tools, and infrequent business users find it hard, which suppresses the participation the platform is meant to enable.

Soketi

  • Maintenance has effectively stalled: the maintainer has said time is severely limited, releases are infrequent, and the community has been discussing whether the project is abandoned, which means security fixes may not arrive.
  • Dependency drift on Node and uWebSockets.js will eventually force you to fork or migrate, and that cost is unbudgeted at the point you adopt it.
  • There is no commercial support to buy, so a production incident at three in the morning is entirely your problem with no escalation path.
  • Scaling beyond a single node needs Redis and careful configuration, and getting presence channels correct across nodes is a genuine source of subtle bugs.
  • It implements the Pusher protocol rather than tracking it, so any protocol feature Pusher adds later will not appear, and the compatibility guarantee slowly decays.

Pricing, plan by plan

MetricStream

On request
  • MetricStream GRC$undefined/year
    • Enterprise risk, audit, compliance and third-party modules
    • Regulatory content libraries
    • Multi-entity and multi-jurisdiction support

Soketi

Free
  • SoketiFree
    • MIT licensed
    • Unlimited connections subject to your own hardware
    • No vendor billing

Which should you pick?

Choose MetricStream if

  • You need enterprise and operational risk.
  • You also want regulatory compliance.
MetricStream review

Choose Soketi if

  • You need pusher protocol compatibility.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows.
  • You also want presence and private channels.
Soketi review

Questions people ask

Is MetricStream or Soketi better?
Neither clearly leads. MetricStream starts at On request and Soketi at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, MetricStream or Soketi?
Soketi has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for MetricStream and Free for Soketi.
Does MetricStream or Soketi run on more platforms?
MetricStream runs on Web. Soketi runs on Linux, macOS, Windows.
Can I use Soketi for free?
Yes. Soketi has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. MetricStream starts at On request.
What is MetricStream best used for?
MetricStream is most often used for a multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examiners, an insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the board, a pharmaceutical company that must track regulatory change across jurisdictions and show what each change affected, an organisation whose three lines of defence must share one risk taxonomy rather than three overlapping spreadsheets. Of those, a multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examiners and an insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the board are not what Soketi is typically brought in for.
What can MetricStream do that Soketi cannot?
MetricStream covers Enterprise and operational risk, Regulatory compliance, Internal audit, Third-party risk. Soketi covers Pusher protocol compatibility, Presence and private channels, Horizontal scaling, App management backends.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

MetricStream: What does MetricStream cost?

It is quoted. Market data suggests roughly 75,000 to 150,000 US dollars a year for small enterprise deployments, 250,000 to 500,000 for medium and 750,000 upwards for large.

Soketi: Is Soketi still maintained?

Barely. The maintainer has stated that available time is very limited and releases have been sparse; treat it as community-maintained.

MetricStream: How long is implementation?

Six to eighteen months for a full platform deployment, and the services cost usually exceeds the first year licence.

Soketi: Do I need to change my client code?

No. Pusher client SDKs and Laravel Echo work by changing the host, port and credentials.

MetricStream: Is it right for a mid-market company?

Usually not. Its depth suits organisations with several regulators and formal three lines of defence structures.

Soketi: What does it cost?

Nothing in licence fees. It is MIT licensed; you pay for the server it runs on.

MetricStream: Does it replace SOC 2 automation tools?

It can cover the framework, but it is not designed for the automated evidence collection those tools do cheaply.

Soketi: What are people moving to?

Laravel Reverb for Laravel applications, and Sockudo, a Rust reimplementation, for others.

Share

Related pages

More on MetricStream

More on Soketi

Keep looking

Other head to heads