IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › Strac Comply · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Strac Comply

3Judge labels

1First choices

0Negative labels

2 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

1 label, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Strac Comply was named 1 time in Compliance automation, where Drata led with 37%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business27 of 60

under the label threshold

Mid-market13 of 54

under the label threshold

Enterprise41 of 54

under the label threshold

In compliance automation · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Strac Comply for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Compliance automation	Security operations	2%	13 of 54	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Drata at 37%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Strac Comply yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Strac Comply across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative0 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labels1

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative3 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Best for SOC 2 + active data security in one platform. Strong evidence automation and integration depth.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Compliance automation · scale prompt · first choice

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Strac Comply, over the 3 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Strac Comply was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Vanta3 of 31Not in the top three

Drata3 of 30Not in the top three

Secureframe3 of 30Not in the top three

Sprinto3 of 30Not in the top three

AuditBoard2 of 30Not in the top three

Centraleyes1 of 30Not in the top three

ComplyJet1 of 30Not in the top three

Hyperproof1 of 30Not in the top three

Jinba1 of 30Not in the top three

OneTrust Certification Automation1 of 30Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Strac Comply. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 3 of the 3 answers that named Strac Comply and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

strac.ioYour site3

expertinsights.com2

planetverify.com2

soc2auditors.org2

vanta.com2

acquisition-international.com1

calqrisk.com1

centraleyes.com1

checkfile.ai1

ciphrix.com1

Thirteen of the sixteen domain citations in answers naming Strac Comply came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

strac.io/blog/soc-2-compliance-software3

planetverify.com/blog/top-15-compliance-automation-tools-in-20242

acquisition-international.com/7-best-soc-2-compliance-software-in-20241

calqrisk.com/compliance-management/evaluating-compliance-software-a-practical-checklist1

centraleyes.com/best-11-soc-2-compliance-software-for-fast-growing-companies1

checkfile.ai/en-US/blog/how-to-choose-compliance-software1

ciphrix.com/blog/compliance-software/compliance-software-selection-criteria1

cloudcomputing-news.net/news/9-soc-2-compliance-software-to-look-out-for-in-20241

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Strac Comply's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Strac Comply, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at strac.io is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.