Palyginti
AIRegistra prieš alternatyvas — sąžiningai.
Trys palyginimai: įmonių GRC paketai, skaičiuoklės, vidiniai savaime kurti įrankiai. Sakome kur AIRegistra laimi, kur pralaimi ir kur priklauso.
Funkcijų matrica
Greta
Vienuolika dimensijų, pagal kurias vidutinės rinkos pirkėjai dažnai lygina. Langeliai siekia būti konkretūs, ne pagražinti.
| Dimension | AIRegistra | Enterprise GRC OneTrust · Drata · Vanta | Spreadsheets / Notion Spreadsheets · Notion · Airtable | DIY internal DIY internal tools |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starting price | €4.99 / user / month (design partner) · €7.99 standard | Annual contract; mid-five to six figures typical | €0–€10 / user / month | Engineering time; ~€20–60k initial build, ~€10k/year maintenance |
| Time to first audit-ready output | ~10 minutes for first snapshot | Weeks to months; usually requires implementation services | Immediate | Weeks to months — first useful version, never finished |
| Tool registry | Centralized inventory of every AI tool — vendor, classification, sensitivity, owner, status. | Treats AI tools as another row in a generic vendor inventory — not AI-aware out of the box. | Hand-curated; goes stale fast as people add tools without updating the sheet. | Whatever schema you design — and re-design as the tool stack changes. |
| EU AI Act-specific content | Per-role checklist, evidence types, snapshot PDF | Generic GRC frame with AI overlay; depth varies by vendor and module tier | You build it; the spreadsheet has no opinion | Whatever you build; the regulatory expertise is your responsibility |
| AI-as-product-feature tracking | Yes — provider role + AI-feature tracking native | Limited — most products treat "AI tool" as another vendor record | Whatever you can fit in columns | Customisable but you build it |
| Per-team budget tracking | Native — budgets per team, 75/90/100% threshold alerts, multi-currency normalisation via cached ECB rates. | Spend tracking via separate FP&A integrations rather than native; per-team allocation usually inherited from finance system. | Whatever formulas you write. Brittle once teams rename or split. | Customisable; tied to whatever finance system you already use. |
| Tool-adoption workflows | Request-approval routing configurable per data class and cost; rationale logged on every decision. | Workflow capability is broad but generic — configurable for compliance approvals, not AI-policy-aware out of the box. | Email + comments + the goodwill of whoever owns the sheet. | Configurable to your taste — but integrating with your AI policy is your job, not the tool's. |
| Role-based access control | Owner / Admin / Member / Viewer at the org; per-team membership; enforced at the platform-rules layer. | Comprehensive — designed for enterprise org structures, granular permissions, often LDAP/AD-driven. | File-level only; everyone with access can edit unless you wire row-level protection by hand. | Whatever your auth layer enforces — typically partial; row-level rules are usually missing. |
| Audit trail | Per-record change history, CSV export | Comprehensive; designed for enterprise audit | Limited — version history at best, no per-record diff | Custom — typically partial coverage |
| Billing-platform imports | Generic CSV import — accepts all common formats from billing platforms. | Extensive; SSO, identity, ticketing, ITSM, billing | Manual paste, occasional Zapier | Whatever you wire |
| Target segment | Any size, mid-market focus | Enterprises (typically 500+) | Any size — and most companies start here | Any size — common in companies with strong internal-tools culture |
Enterprise GRC
vs OneTrust · Drata · Vanta
Broad enterprise governance, risk, and compliance suites that have added AI modules.
OneTrust, Drata, and Vanta are credible choices when you already need broad GRC tooling — SOC 2, ISO 27001, multi-framework audit, vendor risk at enterprise scale. Their AI modules are real and deepening, but their centre of gravity is broad compliance, not AI specifically. For a company that mostly needs AI Act readiness with a fast time-to-value, the price floor and onboarding overhead are usually misaligned with the problem. AIRegistra is narrower, cheaper, and faster to first audit-ready output — but if you already run on one of these platforms or are heading enterprise-scale broadly, integrating AI governance into the existing stack often beats running a parallel tool.
Spreadsheets / Notion
vs Spreadsheets · Notion · Airtable
The default starting point. Free, immediate, infinitely flexible — and infinitely fragile at audit time.
A well-maintained spreadsheet is fine evidence in early stages. The fragility shows up when (a) the spreadsheet has lived long enough to have ten owners, none of whom remember what column G means, (b) an auditor asks for a defensible export and the spreadsheet has no per-record history, or (c) you need to link tools to training records and discover relational data is the wrong shape for a flat sheet. Most companies stay on spreadsheets longer than they should. The right time to move off is not when the spreadsheet breaks — it is when you notice yourself reconstructing what changed last quarter from email threads. AIRegistra is opinionated about the data model and the audit history; the spreadsheet stays nimble and free.
DIY internal
vs DIY internal tools
A custom-built internal tool — usually a low-code platform or a bespoke web app on top of a relational database.
DIY makes sense when (a) you have a clear data model nobody else solves and (b) you have engineering bandwidth to maintain it through a long tail of regulatory changes. The honest case for it: you control the schema, the UX matches your team's mental model, integrations are exact. The honest case against: by month 6, the tool is half-finished, the original author has moved teams, and the EU AI Act has updated three times. Companies that try DIY for AI governance usually end up rebuilding two-thirds of what AIRegistra ships. The exception is companies whose AI governance has unusual constraints (sovereign cloud, custom audit framework, regulator-specific reports) — there, DIY can be the right answer.
Kaip tai rašėme
Palyginimo puslapiai turi blogą reputaciją, nes dauguma yra nesąžiningi konkurentų atžvilgiu. Bandėme kitaip.
- Kur AIRegistra iš tikrųjų prastesnis (pvz., platumas prieš įmonės GRC), sakome tai.
- Kur AIRegistra iš tikrųjų geresnis (kaina, time-to-value vidutinėje rinkoje, EU AI Act fokusas), taip pat sakome.
- Nė vienas konkurentas neminimas klaidinančiai. Kai kelis produktus apima kategorija, jie sugrupuoti.
- Jei klystame, rašykite hello@airegistra.com — atnaujiname puslapį, kai mus pataiso.
Vis dar svarstote?
Bandykite 30 dienų nemokamai. Self-service portalas — atšaukite bet kada. Joks mokestis iki 31 dienos.