Verazo compared to a spreadsheet or an in-house script
A spreadsheet and a cron job can both track compliance status by hand. This page states plainly what breaks first when they do, and what this platform does instead.
This page describes a general pattern, not one named product, so it carries no sources list. Every Verazo claim below maps to this platform's current build, the same standard the rest of this site holds itself to.
Four dimensions where manual tracking runs out
Each row states a specific, checkable fact about this platform against what a spreadsheet or a hand-rolled script structurally cannot do on its own.
| Dimension | Verazo | Spreadsheet or in-house script |
|---|---|---|
| Keeping a setting's status current | A control check calls the target system's own API directly, on a schedule or on demand, and writes a fresh evidence record every time it runs. | A cell is only as current as whoever last logged into the target system and typed in what they saw. Nothing re-checks it until a person remembers to. |
| Evidence for a specific past date | Every evidence record stores the exact date it ran, so a SOC 2 Type II auditor sampling an observation window can request a result for a specific past date, not just today's snapshot. | A spreadsheet cell holds one current value. Reconstructing what it said on a specific date six months ago means finding an old file version, if one was ever saved. |
| Proving a record was not edited after the fact | Every evidence record, approval, and configuration change writes one entry to a hash-chained, HMAC-signed audit ledger. Editing or deleting a past entry breaks every entry chained after it, detectably. | A spreadsheet cell can be edited by anyone with access, with no trace of the change unless a separate version-history feature was turned on and never cleared. |
| Mapping one setting to several frameworks at once | A single control check's evidence rolls up automatically into every framework control it satisfies, across ISO 27001, SOC 2, GDPR, DORA, NIS2, and the EU AI Act, 220 controls tracked today. | Each framework typically gets its own tab or its own tracker, so the same underlying setting gets copied, and re-copied, by hand into every one of them. |
What runs behind those rows
A comparison only means something if the mechanism behind it holds up, so here is what backs the checks and the evidence above.
- 0144 deterministic checks, 24 real integrations.
Every check with an API runs as a plain script against your actual infrastructure. No model decides a pass or fail verdict.
- 02Evidence retained, not just a current value.
A screenshot proving an accessibility violation existed is kept for 10 years from the day it is captured, even after the violation is fixed, matching the evidentiary purpose of proving something existed and was remediated.
- 03A failing check becomes an assigned task, not a stale cell.
A failing check reaches the right person in Slack and email in real time, and the resulting task closes only when the check is re-run and passes again, never from a person's own claim.
A spreadsheet is a reasonable starting point for a first ISO 27001 or SOC 2 attempt. It stops being one the first time an auditor asks for evidence from a specific past date.