No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AuditBoard vs Veza comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

AuditBoard
Ranking in GRC
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
IT Vendor Risk Management (7th)
Veza
Ranking in GRC
26th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Identity Management (IM) (22nd), Privileged Access Management (PAM) (27th), SaaS Security Posture Management (SSPM) (9th), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (8th), Identity Security and Posture Management (ISPM) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the GRC category, the mindshare of AuditBoard is 3.2%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veza is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
GRC Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AuditBoard3.2%
Veza0.7%
Other96.1%
GRC
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2562750 - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Streamlined workflow and enhanced simplicity with an easy setup
I used AuditBoard primarily for risk assessment questionnaires in a very premature risk environment. I also have experience with IBM OpenPages, mostly for operational risk to track issues, to look at risks and controls The collaboration within my team had not yet significantly changed since…
HarshalJethwa - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Operations Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Centralized access control has strengthened least privilege and streamlined audit compliance
The best features Veza offers in my experience are access visibility to see who can access what and which parts, relationship mapping of a user to roles, policies and resources, and risk detection such as over-permission and unused permission privileges. I can perform audit compliance using those features and the platform supports multiple platforms. Out of those features, I find risk detection to be the most valuable in my day-to-day work because I can check who has over-permission or unused permissions and understand relationship mapping and access visibility. Veza has positively impacted my organization by improving access for our users, allowing us to check the user and perform auditing for our system or organization. We are now able to implement least privilege practices, which has made our organization and system more secure.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"There are lots of features."
"The most valuable feature is that everybody can use the same tool. You can give a person permission to use AuditBoard and define their access to the Audit Table. For example, we can allow external auditors or clients to review our completed tests. The clients are attached to specific tests that happen regularly, like inventory counts and asset counts. Debt compliance is only done once annually."
"The most significant feature of AuditBoard is its community tools. It provides an internal communication platform that enables users to communicate within the system rather than relying on external tools such as Outlook or Microsoft products. By communicating within the system, all interactions are centralized and accessible, promoting a streamlined workflow."
"AuditBoard has several solutions for governance, internal audit, and other categories."
"I find the most significant elements of this solution are the out-of-the-box reporting, the ease of workflow, workflow management, and the ease of managing our audit process."
"The most valuable feature of AuditBoard is its ability to facilitate the editing of work papers in a seamless and efficient manner. This is achieved through a built-in tool that allows for real-time editing without the need for downloading the working paper. This feature has proven to be incredibly time-saving for me as it eliminates the step of having to download the file and make changes, instead providing an easy-to-access "edit work paper" option. Overall, this feature has greatly improved my experience with AuditBoard and has been a significant contributor to its success in my opinion."
"The solution is user-friendly, easy to set up, and provides a single console where you can easily track what you need, including how to proceed for reassessment, how to upload evidence, and how to put in a remark."
"The most valuable feature is the well-documented instruction."
"It's the only current GRC vendor with licensing rights for HITRUST 11.3 framework, and I've avoided expensive HITRUST licensing costs through a custom control framework."
"Veza has positively impacted my organization by improving access for our users, allowing us to check the user and perform auditing for our system or organization, and we are now able to implement least privilege practices, which has made our organization and system more secure."
 

Cons

"After sending out a request to my network for documents, it would be great to have a receipt that shows who received the request and who did not."
"The layout for the end user could be improved."
"AuditBoard could benefit from the addition of video capabilities, although it is not a necessity. Small companies that cannot afford licenses for Microsoft Teams or Zoom would benefit greatly from this feature, as it would enhance the communication process."
"The initial setup is somewhat difficult because it has multiple pieces that need to be stitched together. You have to integrate it with the business unit you want to test if you want to go down from the corporate level to the operational level."
"Everything is there, and I have no disadvantage to note as of now."
"AuditBoard is overly simple in some instances and there needs to be flexibility to make it more robust."
"Some of that flexibility could be enhanced. When comparing Archer and TeamMate+, there is a little more open-ended in terms of certain of our audit processes and procedures. And there is significantly greater freedom in creating ad hoc audit processes and procedures, whereas AuditBoard is a little more limiting in this regard."
"They should improve the solution's test sheets feature for ease of use."
"Veza can be improved as it is currently not suitable for small projects due to its high cost, complex setup, and requirement for more integration with multiple systems."
"The support experience could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I highly recommend this tool as the price is reasonable. However, consistent pricing is important, and having a loyalty program that rewards long-term customers with lower prices would be a great addition."
"Pricing is variable, like with any technology, and is determined by how hard you wish to negotiate. You can get to a price you're willing to pay if you're willing to negotiate aggressively."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which GRC solutions are best for your needs.
892,487 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Real Estate/Law Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Healthcare Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with AuditBoard?
AuditBoard is overly simple in some instances and there needs to be flexibility to make it more robust. For IBM OpenPages, the reporting can be more robust as the summary report on each of the modu...
What is your primary use case for AuditBoard?
I used AuditBoard primarily for risk assessment questionnaires in a very premature risk environment. I also have experience with IBM OpenPages, mostly for operational risk to track issues, to look ...
What advice do you have for others considering AuditBoard?
AuditBoard is recommended for smaller companies, particularly for its risk assessment module, which is simple and easy to use. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veza?
The overall price point of Vanta is commendable, especially considering the custom control framework that allows me to evade the high costs associated with HITRUST licensing.
What needs improvement with Veza?
The support experience could be better. We often need to escalate our issues to the account executive to receive a response, especially when support is needed for integrations.
What is your primary use case for Veza?
We are currently in the implementation stages of Vanta. It's been challenging to build out as it is not as intuitive as OneTrust, especially in terms of scoping and needs.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, OneTrust, Diligent and others in GRC. Updated: April 2026.
892,487 professionals have used our research since 2012.