Sprinto Alternative for Third Party Due Diligence

If you’re searching for a Sprinto alternative for third party due diligence, start by deciding whether you need (1) a SOC 2/ISO audit automation platform that can support vendor reviews, or (2) a purpose-built third-party risk workflow tool. Sprinto is strong for audit readiness, but many teams outgrow it for ongoing third-party due diligence operations.

Key takeaways:

• Sprinto excels at SOC 2/ISO 27001 evidence collection and control monitoring, but TPDD teams often need deeper intake, scoping, and review workflows.
• The best “alternative” depends on whether your program centers on audits (GRC/audit automation) or on third-party inventory, tiering, and assessments (TPRM platforms).
• Look hard at workflow fit: intake → risk tiering → due diligence → approvals → renewal cadence → reporting, not just questionnaire templates.

Sprinto has earned real respect because it reduces the grind of audit readiness. On Sprinto’s site and product materials, you’ll see a clear focus on SOC 2 and ISO 27001 audit preparation, continuous evidence collection, and control tracking, with integrations that help teams pull artifacts from common cloud systems. For a security or compliance team trying to get to “audit-ready” without building everything in spreadsheets, that’s valuable.

Where teams hit friction is when third-party due diligence (TPDD) becomes a day-to-day operating motion, not an occasional pre-audit checkbox. TPDD needs reliable intake, scoping, risk tiering, document collection, exception handling, and renewals. It also needs a clean audit trail of who approved what, and why, mapped to frameworks you actually use (for example, vendor oversight expectations reflected in FFIEC guidance for banks, or NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 controls used by many regulated orgs).

Below are Sprinto’s strengths, where it commonly falls short for TPDD workflows, and several credible alternatives (including Daydream) listed in alphabetical order.

What Sprinto does well (and why people like it)

Sprinto’s value is straightforward: audit automation and readiness. Based on Sprinto’s public positioning and product descriptions, teams adopt Sprinto to:

• Track controls and collect evidence for audit frameworks like SOC 2 and ISO 27001.
• Monitor controls over time rather than scramble right before an audit window.
• Connect to common systems to streamline evidence gathering and reduce manual back-and-forth.

In practice, this helps compliance teams reduce “where is that screenshot?” work and focus on fixing gaps that actually affect audit outcomes. If your main pain is passing audits with a small team, Sprinto can be a good fit.

Where Sprinto can fall short for third-party due diligence workflows

Teams searching “Sprinto alternative for third party due diligence” usually aren’t saying Sprinto is bad. They’re saying their vendor/third-party oversight program has different requirements than audit readiness.

Common gaps TPDD owners report when using audit-first tooling for vendor risk:

1. Intake and scoping can feel bolted-on. TPDD starts with intake (who is the third party, what data they touch, what services they provide) and scoping (which diligence path applies). Audit automation platforms often emphasize controls and evidence more than intake routing.
2. Risk tiering + renewal operations need purpose-built workflow. A real program includes tiering rules, periodic reassessments, expirations, and re-approvals. If your tool is optimized for audits, you may still run TPDD operations in spreadsheets and email.
3. Diligence is more than a questionnaire. Many TPDD reviews require document review (SOC 2 reports, pen tests, policies), follow-ups, exceptions, and compensating controls. You need a system that tracks those decisions cleanly.
4. Different stakeholders, different views. Procurement, Legal, Security, Privacy, and Business Owners need tasking, approvals, and status visibility. If the tool doesn’t match that collaboration model, work routes around it.

If those are your pain points, you’re often better served by a TPRM-focused platform or a workflow-first approach that supports TPDD from intake through renewal.

---

Sprinto alternatives for third party due diligence (alphabetical)

Daydream

Daydream is a strong option if you’re leaving Sprinto because your pain is TPDD throughput and review quality, not control evidence for SOC 2/ISO. Teams switching from Sprinto typically tell us they already have audit readiness under control, but they’re drowning in: inconsistent third-party intake, repeated follow-ups for missing artifacts, and slow internal reviews across Security/Legal/Procurement.

Daydream focuses on tightening that operational loop: structured intake, guided due diligence requests, and a clean system of record for what you asked for, what you received, what you accepted, and what you escalated. In our experience, this is where audit-first tools feel awkward because they’re built around your controls, not around a third party’s evidence package and the decision trail you need for approvals and renewals.

Pros

• Better fit for teams that need TPDD to run weekly, not quarterly.
• Emphasizes decisioning, exceptions, and follow-up management that TPDD reviewers live in.

Cons (real limitations)

• Not a full GRC suite; if you want internal controls + enterprise risk + TPDD in one platform, you may prefer a broader system.
• Newer entrant; some enterprise buyers will find fewer prebuilt integrations and a smaller reference base than long-established suites.

Drata

Drata is widely known for SOC 2 audit automation and ongoing compliance monitoring, similar in spirit to Sprinto. If Sprinto has been solid for you but you want a different approach to audit readiness plus a path to supporting vendor reviews, Drata is commonly short-listed. On Drata’s site and documentation, Drata emphasizes continuous control monitoring and evidence collection via integrations.

For TPDD, Drata can help if your due diligence process is closely tied to your own control environment and you mainly need a way to organize artifacts and show audit preparedness. Where teams can still struggle is the “messy middle” of TPDD: intake routing, tiering logic, and multi-stakeholder approvals that behave like procurement workflows rather than audit workflows.

Pros

• Strong audit-readiness motion for SOC 2-oriented teams.
• Continuous monitoring reduces last-minute evidence scrambles.

Cons

• TPDD workflows may feel secondary if your program needs deep third-party intake, tiering, and renewal operations.
• Depending on your process, you may still rely on external tooling for procurement-style routing and approvals.

OneTrust

OneTrust is a common choice for larger organizations because it’s positioned as a broad platform that can cover privacy, security, and governance use cases, including third-party risk. If you’re moving off Sprinto because your organization wants TPDD connected to privacy assessments (for example, DPIAs) and cross-functional governance, OneTrust is often on the list.

For TPDD, the benefit is breadth: multiple teams can work in one environment, and you can align third-party oversight to broader compliance operations. The tradeoff is that breadth often requires more configuration, clearer process design, and dedicated ownership to avoid a tool that becomes “everything to everyone” but slow for day-to-day reviewers.

Pros

• Good fit when TPDD must coordinate with privacy and broader governance workflows.
• Scales for complex stakeholder environments and multiple assessment types.

Cons

• Implementation and configuration can be heavier than audit-first tools.
• Some teams find reviewer workflows slower if the program isn’t tightly standardized.

ProcessUnity

ProcessUnity is a dedicated GRC/TPRM-oriented option frequently evaluated by mature vendor risk teams. If Sprinto helped you with audit readiness but you now need a purpose-built vendor/third-party risk operating system, ProcessUnity is aligned with that direction. Their materials emphasize third-party risk workflows, assessment management, and program operations.

This category tends to fit organizations that already have defined tiering, assessment standards, and governance, and now want the tooling to run it at scale. If you’re earlier-stage, you’ll want to confirm that your team can support the process discipline these platforms assume.

Pros

• Built for ongoing third-party risk operations, not just audit prep.
• Better alignment to mature TPDD lifecycle management (intake through renewals).

Cons

• Heavier program maturity expectation; you need clear policies and ownership.
• Buyers should plan time for workflow configuration and stakeholder training.

Vanta

Vanta is another widely adopted audit automation platform centered on SOC 2/ISO readiness with continuous monitoring and integrations, similar to Sprinto and Drata. If you like Sprinto’s model but want a different product experience, Vanta is frequently evaluated as a peer option. Their public materials emphasize automated evidence collection, policy templates, and audit collaboration features.

For TPDD, Vanta can support vendor security reviews where the primary goal is collecting standardized artifacts and tracking status. Teams often supplement with a more TPRM-specific workflow tool if they need deeper intake, tiering, exception handling, and renewals.

Pros

• Strong for audit readiness with a lot of integration-driven automation.
• Familiar user experience for teams already operating a SOC 2 program.

Cons

• TPDD may remain a secondary workflow if you need complex approvals and renewal governance.
• May not replace a dedicated TPRM system for high-volume third-party portfolios.

---

Feature comparison (TPDD lens)

Dimension	Daydream	Drata	OneTrust	ProcessUnity	Vanta
Primary orientation	TPDD operations and decision tracking for third parties	Audit automation and continuous compliance	Broad governance platform that includes third-party risk	Purpose-built third-party risk / GRC workflows	Audit automation and continuous compliance
Best for	Teams outgrowing audit-first tools for weekly TPDD reviews	SOC 2-driven teams that want continuous evidence workflows	Orgs needing TPDD tied to privacy + governance	Mature TPRM programs running intake→tiering→assess→renew at scale	SOC 2/ISO readiness teams that want strong integrations
Intake + scoping workflows	Designed around third-party intake, follow-ups, and reviewer actions	Often aligned to compliance evidence workflows; TPDD scoping may be lighter	Can support complex routing with configuration	Strong lifecycle workflows; typically configurable to your program	Can track vendor reviews; deeper scoping may require process workarounds
Exception handling + compensating controls	Emphasizes documenting decisions and exceptions per third party	May require custom processes outside core audit flow	Possible with configuration and governance workflows	Typically supports structured issues/exceptions in TPRM lifecycle	Possible, but often not the main workflow center
Reporting for TPDD program ops	Focus on operational visibility (status, bottlenecks, renewals)	Reporting often framed around compliance posture	Broad reporting across modules; depends on setup	Strong program-level reporting aligned to TPRM	Reporting often focused on audit readiness and control status
Implementation profile	Lighter-weight if your goal is TPDD workflow	Faster if you’re already SOC 2-first	Heavier; benefits from admin ownership	Heavier; expects defined program structure	Faster if you’re already SOC 2-first

Decision criteria: which Sprinto alternative should you choose?

Use these as practical “if-then” gates.

1. Choose Daydream if:

• Sprinto worked for audits, but TPDD is now your daily workload.
• You need tighter execution: intake consistency, follow-ups, reviewer queues, decision logs, and renewals.
• Your main stakeholders are Security + Procurement + Legal and you need clean approvals.

2. Choose Drata if:

• Your north star is still SOC 2/ISO readiness and continuous evidence.
• You want a Sprinto-like category peer and will keep TPDD relatively lightweight.

3. Choose OneTrust if:

• TPDD must connect to privacy workflows and broader governance across multiple teams.
• You can support a more involved implementation and ongoing administration.

4. Choose ProcessUnity if:

• You have a mature TPRM program (tiering rules, standard assessments, governance committees).
• You need lifecycle depth and reporting across a large third-party inventory.

5. Choose Vanta if:

• You want to stay audit-automation-first and prefer its product style and ecosystem.
• Your TPDD program is mostly collecting standard artifacts and tracking completion.

Migration considerations and switching costs (what usually bites teams)

1. Inventory normalization: Export your third-party list, dedupe names, and define “third party” vs “vendor” vs “subprocessor.” Most migrations fail here, not in the tool.
2. Tiering rules: Write down the tiering rubric you actually follow (data sensitivity, access method, criticality, regulatory scope). Then configure the tool around it.
3. Historical evidence: Decide what must be migrated (final reports, approvals, exceptions) vs archived. Moving every email thread rarely pays off.
4. Workflow ownership: Assign one program owner for intake taxonomy, questionnaire logic, and renewal cadences. Shared ownership creates inconsistent decisions.
5. Stakeholder change management: Procurement and Legal will judge the tool by task clarity and turnaround time. Pilot with real requests before a big-bang cutover.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Sprinto a bad fit for third-party due diligence?

No. Sprinto is respected for audit readiness and evidence workflows. Teams look for a Sprinto alternative for third party due diligence when the day-to-day TPDD lifecycle (intake, tiering, renewals, exceptions) becomes the primary need.

What’s the biggest difference between audit automation and TPRM tooling?

Audit automation centers on your internal controls and evidence collection. TPRM/TPDD tooling centers on third-party intake, assessment workflows, follow-ups, approvals, and renewals across many third parties.

Can I run TPDD with Vanta or Drata instead of a TPRM platform?

You can for lighter programs, especially if you mainly collect standard artifacts and track completion. If you need robust tiering, exception handling, and renewal operations, many teams add a TPDD-focused workflow tool.

Which alternative works best for regulated financial services?

Many financial institutions align TPDD to FFIEC guidance and similar supervisory expectations. If you need mature lifecycle workflows and reporting, a dedicated TPRM platform is often a better fit than audit-only tooling; confirm mapping to your internal policy and regulator expectations.

What should I migrate first if I’m switching from Sprinto?

Start with your third-party inventory, tiering rubric, and the minimum set of historical approvals/exceptions you need for audit trail. Then migrate active assessments and renewals; older closed items can stay in an archive.