# 9 Best EY Competitors for SOC 2 & ISO 27001 Readiness (2026)

> Compare the 9 best EY competitors for SOC 2 and ISO 27001 readiness in 2026. What each provider does, what stays on your team, pricing, and who signs the report.

Published: 2026-10-31  
Canonical: https://evnaro.co/blog/best-ey-competitors

Most buyers who end up comparing EY competitors are not buying one framework. A US enterprise customer wants the SOC 2 report; a European tenant or a procurement team in the UK wants the ISO 27001 certificate; the board wants both handled without doubling the work.

EY's pitch is built for exactly that buyer: a SOC attestation practice and, through EY CertifyPoint, a dedicated accredited ISO certification body, under one name.

That pairing is a real convenience, and it leaves the harder question open. Two frameworks from one firm are still two engagements, two readiness assessments, two independence conclusions, and two cycles of surveillance and re-examination.

What a buyer running SOC 2 and ISO 27001 together needs to know is how much of the first framework's work the second one reuses, who does the work in between, and whether anyone commits to the date on either.

So this guide compares Ernst and Young competitors on the two-framework problem. Can one provider handle both. How much of the SOC 2 control set and evidence carries into the ISO 27001 ISMS. Who performs the remediation each framework calls for. Who signs the report and who issues the certificate, and how independence is documented for each. And whether a fee is at risk on the date.

Three ways the providers here answer it:

1. Advisory and attestation firms assess, recommend, and, as licensed CPA firms, sign the SOC report; several also hold ISO accreditation or partner with a body that does. The work between assessment and examination is yours, on each framework.
2. Accredited certification bodies issue the ISO 27001 certificate and, by accreditation rule, cannot build the ISMS they certify; for SOC 2 they either partner or stay out.
3. A service performs the work once, on one control library, and maps it to both frameworks, with your team reviewing and signing; the SOC auditor and the ISO certification body remain independent third parties.

Nine companies like EY in the work they do, and one that works differently, each confirmed from its own published material: three Big Four assurance practices, a national CPA firm, three specialist firms that hold both CPA licensure and ISO accreditation, a global certification body, and EasyAudit.

Anything about a named firm that could not be sourced to that firm appears as a question for you to ask, and every one applies to EY as well.

We built EasyAudit. Read our entry knowing that; the scoring is published, and we scored ourselves on the same seven criteria as everyone else.

The verdict in a nutshell: EasyAudit is the best overall pick for regulated companies that need SOC 2 and ISO 27001 both, want one program rather than two projects, and want a fee behind the date.

The [Compliance Simulation](https://evnaro.co/compliance-simulation) scores readiness for both frameworks on your real environment, takes about 75 minutes of scheduled time across two calls, and the report is yours either way.

Among the firms, A-LIGN and Schellman each hold CPA licensure and ISO accreditation in one organization and can examine both frameworks, Coalfire adds breadth across ISO standards, and PwC leads the Big Four alternatives on SOC 2+ combined reporting.

| **Best Overall** | **Best Single Firm for SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Together** | **Best Concurrent SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Examination** | **Best Big Four Option for SOC 2+ Reports** |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| EasyAudit | A-LIGN | Schellman | PwC |

## Top EY Alternatives for SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Readiness: Comparison Chart

| **Provider** | **Best For** | **Delivery Model** | **SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage** | **What Stays On Your Team** | **Who Signs the Report** | **vs. EY** | **Score** |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| EasyAudit | Best Overall | Service | Both frameworks as one program on one control library: policies, controls, evidence and auditor coordinationperformed; readiness scored per framework in the free Simulation. | Review and sign-off. Under ten hours a year in steady state. | An independent CPA auditor signs the SOC report; an accreditedcertificationbody issues the ISOcertificate. EasyAuditnever signs either. | One programinstead of twoengagements; the secondframeworkreuses the first. | 9.3 |
| A-LIGN | Best Single Firm for SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Together | Advisoryandattestation | Both from one firm: readiness assessment, A-SCEND evidence platform with cross-framework reuse of submissions, SOC examination and ISO 27001 certification audit. | Remediationon bothframeworksbetweenassessmentand audit. | A-LIGN, licensed CPA firm andaccredited ISO 27001 body. | Bothframeworksunder one roof, as EY, with a free evidenceplatform in between. | 7.7 |
| Coalfire | Best for Multi-Standard ISO Alongside SOC 2 | Advisoryandattestation | Readiness and mock audit; SOC attestation via Coalfire Controls, ISO certification via Coalfire Certificationacross many ISO standards. | Remediationbetweenassessments; separate firm for ISO internal audit and risk assessment in one published account. | Coalfire Controls (CPA) for SOC; Coalfire Certification (ANAB, UKAS) for ISO. | Both frameworks from affiliatedentities, with wider ISO coverage. | 7.5 |
| Schellman | Best Concurrent SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Examination | Advisoryandattestation | Concurrent SOC 2 examination and ISO 27001 certification by a single assessor team; readiness via a separate non-attest entity. | All remediation and programoperation on both frameworks. | Schellman & Company, licensed CPA firm and ANAB and UKASaccreditedbody. | Bothframeworksexaminedtogether by one firm; independence by corporatestructure. | 7.4 |
| BSI | Best Standalone ISO Certification Body | Advisory andcertification | ISO 27001 certificationthrough BSI Assurance; ISMSimplementationand SOC 2 readiness through a separateconsultingpractice. | Remediationand ISMSoperationunless theconsultingpractice is engaged. | BSI Assurance for ISOcertificates; BSI does not issue SOC 2 reports. | ISO side only; the SOC report must come from a CPA firm you appoint. | 6.8 |
| PwC | Best Big Four Option for SOC 2+ Combined Reports | Advisoryandattestation | SOC readinessassessment and SOC examination, including SOC 2+ combined reports; ISO 27001 services published by member firms. | All remediation and programoperationbetweenreadiness and examination. | PwC, licensed CPA firm, for SOC; ISOcertificationthrough an accredited PwC entity in some regions, subject to independence. | Same Big Four pairing, with SOC 2+ as thedistinctiveoption. | 6.6 |
| BDO | Best CPA Firm for an Estimate Before a Proposal | Advisoryandattestation | Free consultation and estimate, readiness assessment, SOC 1, 2, 2+ or 3 report. ISO 27001 certification not described on the pages reviewed. | Remediationbetweenreadiness andexamination. | BDO, licensed CPA firm. | SOC side only, with an estimatebefore a proposal; ISO must be sourcedelsewhere. | 6.6 |
| Deloitte | Best Big Four Option for Enterprise Procurement | Advisoryandattestation | SOC readiness services and attestation, FedRAMP and HITRUST alongside; ISO 27001 advisory via regional member firms. | All remediation and programoperationbetweenreadiness and examination. | Deloitte, licensed CPA firm, for SOC. ISOcertificatesfrom a separateaccreditedbody. | Same Big Four model; ISO handledoutside the US practice. | 6.4 |
| KPMG | Best Big Four Readiness Review With ISO Mapping | Advisoryandattestation | SOC readiness review with a mapping to ISO 27001, SOC attestation; ISO implementation and certificationsupport via member firms. | All remediation and programoperation. The client proposes and implements the controls. | KPMG, licensed CPA firm, for SOC. ISOcertificatesfrom a separateaccreditedbody. | Same Big Four model; the readiness review maps SOC to ISO but certification is external. | 6.3 |

_Delivery model: Service means the provider's people perform the recurring compliance work. Advisory and_ _attestation means the firm assesses readiness and, as a licensed CPA firm, examines and signs the SOC report;_ _remediation in between is the customer's. Advisory and certification means the same structure for ISO 27001_ _through an accredited certification body._

_Data current as of October 2026. No firm here publishes a rate for readiness, attestation or certification work._ _Every firm description comes from that firm's own published service pages; where a fact could not be sourced_ _there, the entry poses it as a question for the buyer to ask._

## Why Look for Alternatives to EY?

Three reasons, each starting from EY's own published material. EY describes a SOC readiness assessment that typically includes a review of existing controls, a gap analysis, documentation evaluation and actionable recommendations before the examination; a SOC reporting and attestation service covering SOC 1, SOC 2 and ISAE 3402; and EY CertifyPoint, a dedicated accredited body that certifies ISO management systems.

By its own figures EY issues more than 3,000 SOC reports to more than 900 clients a year. Here is what follows.

### One firm, two frameworks, still two engagements

A SOC attestation practice and an ISO certification body under one name does not make SOC 2 and ISO 27001 one program.

The readiness assessment is scoped per framework, the examination and the certification audit are separate engagements, the ISO cycle adds surveillance audits in years two and three, and the controls and evidence that satisfy both are collected by your team for each.

Ask EY, and every firm offering both, what percentage of SOC 2 controls and evidence the ISO 27001 engagement reuses, and whether the readiness assessment is performed once or twice.

### Two independence conclusions, not one

Under the AICPA Code, a firm that designs and implements controls generally cannot attest to those same controls where doing so impairs its independence. Under ISO accreditation rules, a certification body cannot advise on the management system it certifies.

A firm that offers readiness, SOC attestation and ISO certification therefore has two independence questions to answer, one for each party that signs. Ask for both conclusions in writing before scoping. A provider that signs neither has removed both questions.

### The pairing is built for enterprise scale

This is a fit problem, not a quality problem. EY's assurance practice and CertifyPoint are organized around large clients with compliance functions that will carry two frameworks' worth of recommendations. A 200-person insurer, a BPO expanding into Europe or a data center operator with its first international tenant is buying the same two-engagement structure at the same cadence.

Ask how each engagement is staffed at your size, what the second framework costs when it is scoped separately, and whether the Big Four name is a customer requirement for both frameworks or only one.

None of this argues against EY. For an organization whose customers expect the name on both the report and the certificate, and whose compliance team wants one firm to coordinate with, EY's pairing is a legitimate advantage. The rest of this guide is for the buyer who wants the two frameworks run as one program, with the work performed and a date committed.

## How We Evaluated These EY Competitors

Seven criteria, scored one to ten and weighted, with the weights published so the arithmetic is yours to check. They follow what buyers ask before signing: who performs the work, what it costs and on what terms, whether a date is committed, and how the examination and certification are handled.

The criteria, the weights and every provider's scores are identical across every page of this series.

### Our Scoring Methodology

| **Criterion** | **Weight** | **What we looked for** |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Work performed for you versus work left on your team | 25% | Who writes the policies, maps the controls, chases the evidence and talks to the auditor. The single biggest question buyers raise before they sign. |
| Pricing clarity and commitment terms | 20% | Whether a buyer can see a program price before signing, what the second framework costs, and what happens at renewal. |
| Timeline certainty and consequence if missed | 15% | Whether the provider commits to a date, and what it costs the provider if the date slips. |
| Assurance handling and independence | 15% | Who issues the result, whether that party is a licensed CPA firm or an accredited certification body where the framework requires one, whether the provider that prepared you can also sign, and how independence is documented. |
| Multi-framework reuse | 10% | Whether the second and third frameworks reuse the controls and evidence from the first, or start a new project. |
| Environment fit | 10% | Microsoft-heavy estates, on-prem systems, data center and contact center floors, and other operations that cloud-native tooling was not built for. |
| Evidence a third party will accept | 5% | Approvals recorded with who and when, an audit trail the application cannot bypass, and read-only access for the auditor, certification body or reviewer. |

Work performed carries the heaviest weight because with two frameworks the work doubles unless someone performs it once. A readiness assessment on each framework tells you twice where you stand; the weeks after, when two gap lists have owners on your side, decide whether either date holds.

| **Provider** | **Work (25%)** | **Pricing (20%)** | **Timeline (15%)** | **Assurance (15%)** | **Multi-framework (10%)** | **Environment (10%)** | **Evidence (5%)** | **Weighted** |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| EasyAudit | 10 | 8 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 9.3 |
| A-LIGN | 7 | 7 | 7 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 7.7 |
| Coalfire | 7 | 6 | 7 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 7.5 |
| Schellman | 6 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 7.4 |
| BSI | 6 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 6.8 |
| PwC | 5 | 4 | 6 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 6.6 |
| BDO | 5 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 6.6 |
| Deloitte | 5 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 6.4 |
| KPMG | 5 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 10 | 6.3 |

_Weighted totals are rounded to one decimal. The score on each provider entry, the score in the comparison_ _chart, and this table reconcile. Ties are broken on the first criterion, then the second. Every provider carries_ _identical scores on every page of this series; the one exception is EasyAudit's timeline score on the NIST CSF_ _page, explained there, because no fee is at risk on CSF itself._

## 9 Best Alternatives to EY Consulting in 2026 Reviewed

Each entry is organized around the two-framework problem: how the provider covers SOC 2 and ISO 27001, what carries between them, who performs the work on each, who signs, and where the model fits. Ranked by the score above.

### 1. EasyAudit

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x769/098cc66a65/best-pwc-competitors-01-easyaudit.webp)

**Best for:** regulated companies that need SOC 2 and ISO 27001 both, want one program rather than two projects, and want a fee behind the date.

**Compliance Service Score:** 9.3/10

#### Service Overview

EasyAudit is a compliance service for organizations that have to be compliant and do not want to run compliance. A named human compliance expert leads your engagement from start to finish, the AI Compliance Officer executes the recurring work, and the platform is the shared foundation and memory both work from.

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/2880x1800/ea5ad91373/01-simulation-report-pwc-alternatives-companies-like-deloitte-2x.png)

One service, not three products, and one program, not one per framework. Our founder came out of Big Four risk advisory, which is where we learned how two frameworks turn into two engagements, and why we built it differently.

If a US customer wants the SOC 2 report and an international one wants the ISO 27001 certificate, and the people who would run two readiness programs are your security, engineering and legal staff, we built it for you, and we built it for regulated companies: the ones whose customers, regulators, insurers or contracts require proof, in whatever industry that pressure arrives.

Two things set us apart in this guide:

1. Both frameworks run on one control library. A control implemented once satisfies SOC 2 and ISO 27001 wherever each asks for it, one evidence set covers both, and the Simulation scores readiness for both before you sign.
2. The date is locked at signature and our fee is behind it, with the SOC auditor and the ISO certification body remaining independent third parties who determine the result.

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/2880x1800/1eb3a13991/02-the-record-pwc-competitors-deloitte-alternatives-nist-soc-2-iso-27001-2x.png)

#### The 3 Two-Framework Problems We Built EasyAudit to Solve

#### Two frameworks become two programs

SOC 2 and ISO 27001 ask for most of the same things: access control, change management, risk assessment, vendor oversight, incident response. In an advisory model each framework still gets its own readiness assessment, its own gap list and its own evidence collection, and the overlap is rediscovered by your team halfway through the second one.

We run one control library that every framework maps into. One control satisfies up to seven frameworks, one evidence set covers all mappings, and the program carries 60 to 70 percent fewer controls than running frameworks in parallel. Your SOC 2 program is your ISMS foundation. Add a framework. Do not add a person.

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/2880x1800/0ac41fd42c/03-generated-policy-pwc-nist-csf-services-soc-2-solutions-iso-27001-services-2x.png)

#### The work lands on your team, twice

A readiness assessment on each framework produces recommendations on each framework. Someone writes two sets of policies, closes two gap lists, collects evidence for an examination and again for Stage 2, and answers an auditor and then a certification body. In an advisory model that someone is you.

We perform it, once. Our AI Compliance Officer drafts the policies from your environment, collects the evidence, and prescribes the exact fix for every gap under both frameworks. Our named compliance expert reviews every piece of work and coordinates the SOC auditor and the certification body directly. Your team reviews and signs. The work does not disappear. It changes owners, and it happens once.

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/2880x1800/e7d07fc28f/05-nist-csf-2-0-monitoring-nist-csf-assessment-2x.png)

#### Two cycles, and nobody's fee rides on either date

SOC 2 Type II has an observation window and an annual report. ISO 27001 has Stage 1, Stage 2, surveillance audits in years two and three, and recertification. Firms are paid when each assessment is delivered and each examination performed; whether you were ready on the date a customer needed is on none of the invoices.

Ours is. Audit-ready and submitted to an independent auditor or accredited certification body by the date committed at signature, or you do not pay. The [Audit-Ready Guarantee](https://evnaro.co/audit-ready-guarantee) applies to eligible engagements and covers readiness and submission. The auditor and the certification body alone determine their results, and that boundary sits beside the guarantee every time we state it.

After the first audit, 3,950+ continuous monitoring checks keep both frameworks true between examinations.

#### Interactive Product Demo

#### Frameworks Covered

SOC 1, [SOC 2](https://evnaro.co/frameworks/soc-2), [ISO 27001](https://evnaro.co/frameworks/iso-27001), ISO 42001, ISO 9001, NIST CSF 2.0 and CMMC, on one control library. For the buyer on this page the pairing that matters is SOC 2 and ISO 27001, and the ISMS built here is also the foundation for ISO 42001 and ISO 9001 when they follow.

A control implemented once satisfies up to seven frameworks, one evidence set covers all mappings, and the program carries 60 to 70 percent fewer controls than running frameworks in parallel.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

One investment for the program, fixed at signature, from the Compliance Simulation run on your own environment. The Simulation Report scores readiness per framework, prioritizes every material gap, states the work, dates the timeline and prices the investment, with a written recommendation from the expert who ran it. There is no second readiness fee for the second framework. For a directional figure beforehand, use the [cost calculator](https://evnaro.co/compliance-calculator).

Compare it to two advisory engagements: two readiness assessments, two sets of remediation hours, and the internal time between four or more examinations over three years. We replace all of it. The SOC auditor's fee and the certification body's fees remain separate, because independent third parties issue the results. We are not the lowest-priced option on this page, and the Tradeoffs section says so.

#### The Audit-Ready Guarantee

Audit-ready and submitted to an independent auditor or accredited certification body by the committed date, or you do not pay, for eligible engagements. It covers readiness and submission for the frameworks in scope, never the opinion or the certificate, which no provider can promise.

The order of operations makes it possible: the Simulation scores readiness for each framework on your real environment before we commit, so the dates are calculated rather than estimated. [Read the guarantee](https://evnaro.co/audit-ready-guarantee).

#### What Stays On Your Team

Business knowledge, review of key decisions, and signatures where your authority is required, including the ISMS scope, the risk register, the Statement of Applicability and the policies. Under ten hours a year in steady state across both frameworks, because the recurring work transfers to us instead of shrinking on your calendar. We write the policies; your team reviews and signs.

Controls are accepted in one click with who approved and when recorded. A 15-minute meeting closes three to four evidence items. Signed-statement templates mean you never hit a dead end.

#### Setup

A mutual NDA the same day. Documents dropped into a workspace without cleanup. A scoping questionnaire covering both frameworks. Read-only connections, with temporary credentials and OAuth, live on the first 30-minute call.

The environment is pre-built before your decision makers join the second call, where they see readiness per framework, gaps, scope, price and the committed dates on their own data. About 75 minutes of scheduled time for both frameworks together.

#### Tradeoffs

An organization whose customers expect the EY name on both the report and the certificate, or whose financial auditor is already EY, has a legitimate reason to consolidate there, and we compete on the date and the economics rather than on brand.

Licensed CPA firms on this page can sign the SOC 2 opinion and accredited bodies can issue the ISO certificate; we never issue either. A compliance function that wants to run two programs itself and use two readiness assessments as its plans is well served by an advisory engagement.

We are not built for a 1 to 10 person company chasing a single framework with no external pressure. We cost more than a software seat, and the guarantee covers readiness and submission by the committed date for eligible engagements, not the results.

#### Support

One named compliance expert owns your engagement across both frameworks: sets the plan, checks every piece of work, deals with your SOC auditor and your certification body directly through the examination, Stage 1, Stage 2 and every surveillance audit, and checks in with you every two days.

Where controls require it, they attend your facility; data center floors, contact center floors and FDA-regulated manufacturing are in scope. You never have to log in; you always can.

#### Mini Case Study

TheStage AI builds an optimization and deployment engine for machine learning models, and its clients in automotive, healthcare and finance hand it proprietary models, telemetry and confidential IP. Enterprise IT and legal teams required audited controls before committing, and competitors were positioning compliance as table stakes.

We ran the SOC 2 program end to end, from scoping and the risk assessment through generated policies, evidence and CPA coordination, while the research team stayed on the product. That SOC 2 program is the control foundation an ISO 27001 ISMS and an ISO 42001 program are built on, which is the point of running them as one. [Read the TheStage AI story](https://evnaro.co/case-studies/thestage)

### 2. A-LIGN

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x767/8026d70a21/best-pwc-competitors-02-a-lign.webp)

**Best for:** organizations that want SOC 2 and ISO 27001 from one firm that holds both CPA licensure and ISO accreditation, with an evidence platform that reuses submissions across the two.

**Compliance Service Score:** 7.7/10

A-LIGN is the closest structural match to EY's pairing among the specialist firms: a licensed CPA practice and an accredited ISO 27001, ISO 27701 and ISO 22301 certification body in one organization, with an evidence platform in between. Its own site claims the top SOC 2 issuer position worldwide, more than 3,500 SOC 2 assessments, and over 100 SOC 2 auditors.

#### SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage

A-LIGN performs the SOC 2 examination and the ISO 27001 certification audit itself, with a readiness assessment recommended ahead of each. Its A-SCEND platform centralizes evidence and audit requests and lets submissions be reused across frameworks, which is the closest any firm here comes to collecting evidence once for both.

HITRUST, FedRAMP, PCI DSS and CMMC are available from the same firm, and customers may bring their own compliance tooling.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

Quote only for the assessments and the audits; A-LIGN publishes no rates. A-SCEND's automation and audit-readiness features are offered on a free tier, so the platform cost can be zero while each framework's assessment and audit are priced by engagement. Ask whether the two readiness assessments are scoped as one, and how the three-year ISO cycle is priced alongside the annual SOC 2 report.

#### What Stays On Your Team

Remediation on both frameworks between assessment and audit. A-LIGN identifies the gaps and later tests whether they were closed; A-SCEND organizes the evidence your team produces.

#### Who Signs the Report

A-LIGN itself, as a licensed CPA firm for the SOC report and an accredited body for the ISO certificate. Because one organization assesses and signs on both, ask for the independence conclusion in writing for each framework.

#### Tradeoffs

A-LIGN is the strongest single-firm answer for a buyer who wants SOC 2 and ISO 27001 under one roof without a Big Four price, and the cross-framework reuse in A-SCEND is a real reduction in duplicate evidence. The remediation on both frameworks is still yours, and neither date is committed.

Published reviews split on billing: one Gartner Peer Insights reviewer called pricing reasonable, another criticized billing on a disputed audit date.

### 3. Coalfire

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x763/92dc6e1b29/best-pwc-competitors-03-coalfire.webp)

**Best for:** organizations pairing SOC 2 with several ISO standards at once, with a mock audit from certification body staff before Stage 2.

**Compliance Service Score:** 7.5/10

Coalfire covers both sides through affiliated entities and goes wider on the ISO side than most. Coalfire Controls, a licensed CPA affiliate, delivers more than 500 SOC reports a year; Coalfire Certification, accredited by ANAB since 2015 and UKAS since 2019, audits ISO 27001 alongside 27017, 27018, 27701, 42001, 9001, 20000-1 and 22301.

#### SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage

For SOC 2, a readiness assessment documents controls, finds gaps and recommends remediation before the report. For ISO, a lead auditor facilitates readiness and a mock audit by certification body staff before Stage 1 and Stage 2, and several ISO standards can be audited in one engagement.

Compliance Essentials coordinates evidence across 80-plus frameworks, and combined SOC reports with HIPAA or CSA STAR reduce repeat testing.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

Quote only, and Coalfire's AWS Marketplace listings for SOC and ISO readiness also require a quote. Ask for the SOC readiness, the ISO readiness, the mock audit and each audit priced separately, and for the three-year ISO lifecycle in full.

#### What Stays On Your Team

Everything between assessments on both frameworks. One published customer account describes engaging a separate firm for the ISO risk assessment and internal audit before Coalfire's certification audit.

#### Who Signs the Report

Two entities: Coalfire Controls, a licensed CPA firm, for the SOC report; Coalfire Certification, an accredited body, for the ISO certificate. Ask how independence is documented for each where the same organization advises and attests.

#### Tradeoffs

Coalfire suits a cloud service provider or an organization pairing SOC 2 with a cluster of ISO standards, and the mock audit is a genuine advantage before a first Stage 2. The model is advisory on both frameworks, the depth costs more than a mid-market buyer may need, and the certifying arm cannot close the gaps its readiness work finds.

### 4. Schellman

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x768/b61f7595c7/best-pwc-competitors-04-schellman.webp)

**Best for:** organizations that want SOC 2 and ISO 27001 examined concurrently by a single assessor team, with readiness and attestation in legally separate entities.

**Compliance Service Score:** 7.4/10

Schellman is the firm most often named for running SOC 2 and ISO 27001 at the same time. A single-assessor approach lets one team take an organization through the SOC 2 examination and the ISO 27001 certification audit concurrently, and the firm separates readiness (Schellman Compliance) from attestation and certification (Schellman & Company) by corporate structure.

It issues more than 2,000 SOC reports a year and holds ANAB and UKAS accreditation for ISO 27001, with ANAB accreditation across ISO 27701, 20000-1, 9001 and 22301 and first-mover accreditation for ISO 42001.

#### SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage

Readiness on either or both frameworks comes from the non-attest entity as a gap assessment with recommended remediation. The attest entity then performs the SOC 2 examination and Stage 1 and Stage 2 for ISO 27001, concurrently where the customer wants both, and issues the report and the certificate. Schellman sells no platform and works with all the major ones.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

Quote only, scoped to the criteria, the report type and the environment's size. Schellman publishes no rates. Ask for readiness on each framework, the concurrent examination, and for ISO the surveillance and recertification audits, priced on one page.

#### What Stays On Your Team

All of it, on both frameworks. The readiness entity advises; the attest entity examines. Implementation, policies and evidence between the two are your team's or a third party's.

#### Who Signs the Report

Schellman & Company, as a licensed CPA firm for the SOC report and an accredited certification body for the ISO certificate. The two-entity structure is Schellman's independence documentation; ask for it as it applies to your concurrent engagement.

#### Tradeoffs

Schellman is the pick when the two frameworks must be examined together under one name your customers recognize, and when ISO 42001 is coming. It is not a readiness service in the performing sense, neither date is committed, and the assessment fee buys advice. Plan early around peak Q4 and Q1 scheduling.

### 5. BSI

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x764/7b9631314b/best-pwc-competitors-05-bsi.webp)

**Best for:** organizations that want the ISO 27001 certificate from the body enterprise procurement recognizes first, and will appoint a CPA firm separately for SOC 2.

**Compliance Service Score:** 6.8/10

BSI covers the ISO side of the pairing as the body enterprise procurement teams expect to see on the certificate, and offers SOC 2 readiness through a separate consulting practice without issuing the report. BSI Assurance certifies; BSI's consulting practice implements. Deloitte's own announcements name BSI as the certifier of its ISMS in several regions.

#### SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage

BSI Assurance performs Stage 1, Stage 2 and the surveillance and recertification audits across ISO 27001, ISO 27701, ISO 22301, ISO 9001 and ISO 42001. BSI's consulting practice offers ISMS development, risk assessment, policy creation, internal audits for certification readiness, and SOC 2 readiness aligned to the AICPA Trust Services Criteria; the SOC 2 report itself comes from a licensed auditor you appoint.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

Quote only for both practices. BSI publishes no rates. Ask for the three-year ISO cycle from the certifying arm, the consulting scope separately, and which CPA firm will sign the SOC report, because BSI will not.

#### What Stays On Your Team

With BSI Assurance alone, everything but the ISO audit. With BSI Consulting engaged, ISMS implementation and SOC 2 readiness can be scoped, staffed separately from the certifying arm to protect impartiality. The SOC 2 examination is a third party.

#### Who Signs the Report

BSI Assurance for the ISO certificate. BSI is not a CPA firm and does not issue SOC 2 reports; a separate licensed auditor signs that.

#### Tradeoffs

BSI is the right choice when the ISO certificate's issuer is what your customers check and SOC 2 can be handled with a CPA firm you appoint. The certifying arm cannot close gaps, the consulting arm is its own scope, neither date is committed, and a two-framework buyer is coordinating three parties.

### 6. PwC

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x773/8272917062/best-deloitte-competitors-06-pwc.webp)

**Best for:** organizations that need a Big Four letterhead on the SOC report, with SOC 2+ folding NIST, HITRUST or GDPR criteria into one examination.

**Compliance Service Score:** 6.6/10

PwC covers the SOC side on its US pages and the ISO side through member firms, which makes the pairing less unified than EY's but the SOC offering more specific.

Its SOC reporting page describes a readiness assessment with gap identification and improvement recommendations, SOC 1, SOC 2 and SOC 3 reports, and SOC 2+ combined reports folding NIST, HITRUST or GDPR criteria into one examination.

#### SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage

For SOC 2, readiness precedes the examination and PwC recommends starting with the controls that matter most to customers and expanding scope over time. For ISO 27001, PwC member firms publish gap analysis, ISMS implementation and readiness services, with certification through an accredited PwC entity in some regions where independence requirements allow.

Whether both frameworks are coordinated by one team depends on the region and the engagement.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

Quote only, scoped by engagement. PwC publishes no rates. Ask whether SOC 2 and ISO 27001 readiness are scoped as one engagement or two, and how certification through the accredited entity is priced where it is available.

#### What Stays On Your Team

All of it, on both frameworks. Recommendations are the deliverable; remediation, policies, evidence and the program between readiness and examination are the customer's to perform or to source elsewhere.

#### Who Signs the Report

PwC, as a licensed CPA firm, for the SOC report. For ISO 27001, PwC's own material conditions certification through its accredited entity on independence requirements. Ask for the conclusion in writing for each framework.

#### Tradeoffs

PwC fits an organization that needs a Big Four letterhead on the SOC report, already has PwC as financial auditor, or needs a SOC 2+ report combining criteria in one examination. The ISO side varies by region, the work on both frameworks returns to your team between engagements, and scope is designed to grow rather than close on a date.

### 7. BDO

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x766/669b337ab2/best-pwc-competitors-06-bdo.webp)

**Best for:** organizations that want a national CPA firm for the SOC side with an estimate before a proposal, and are prepared to source ISO 27001 certification elsewhere.

**Compliance Service Score:** 6.6/10

BDO covers the SOC side of the pairing. Its own pages describe a free compliance consultation and a SOC 2 report estimate, then a readiness assessment to identify and plan the rectification of gaps, then the SOC 1, 2, 2+ or 3 report under SSAE 18 and its Canadian equivalent. The pages reviewed do not describe an ISO 27001 certification offering.

#### SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage

The readiness assessment evaluates the systems involved in processing data across security, privacy, confidentiality, availability and processing integrity and produces a plan for closing gaps before the examination. For ISO 27001 a buyer would appoint a separate certification body and either run the ISMS internally or engage another provider.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

Quote only, but with a free initial consultation and a report estimate before scoping. Ask what the readiness assessment costs beyond the consultation, how the Type II observation period is priced, and whether BDO coordinates with an ISO certification body you appoint.

#### What Stays On Your Team

Remediation between readiness and examination on the SOC side, and the entire ISO 27001 program.

#### Who Signs the Report

BDO, as a licensed CPA firm, for the SOC report. ISO certificates would come from a separate accredited body you choose. Ask how independence is documented where BDO both plans the rectification and examines the result.

#### Tradeoffs

BDO fits an organization whose immediate need is the SOC 2 report from a national CPA firm that will give a number before a proposal, and that will handle ISO 27001 separately. For a buyer who needs both frameworks coordinated, BDO is half the answer by its own published scope.

### 8. Deloitte

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x768/9ad2a14d04/best-pwc-competitors-07-deloitte.webp)

**Best for:** organizations where the Deloitte name is a procurement requirement for the SOC report, with FedRAMP or HITRUST alongside and ISO handled regionally.

**Compliance Service Score:** 6.4/10

Deloitte covers the SOC side on its US third-party assurance page and the ISO side through regional member firms. The US page frames the offering as advising on control effectiveness and performing attestation engagements for SOC 1 and SOC 2, with FedRAMP and HITRUST assessments alongside, as part of a broader compliance and conformance program.

#### SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage

Readiness advises before the SOC examination; attestation produces the report. ISO 27001 advisory appears on member-firm pages rather than the US site, and the certificate comes from a separate accredited body. A two-framework buyer should ask how, and whether, the two are coordinated by one team.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

Quote only, scoped by engagement. Deloitte publishes no rates. Ask what the readiness engagement costs and produces for each framework, and how the SOC attestation is scoped and priced separately.

#### What Stays On Your Team

All of it, on both frameworks. Readiness advises; attestation examines. Remediation, policies, evidence and the program between engagements are performed by your team or a separate provider.

#### Who Signs the Report

Deloitte, as a licensed CPA firm, for the SOC report. ISO certificates come from a separate accredited body. Ask for the independence conclusion in writing where the same firm performs readiness and attestation.

#### Tradeoffs

Deloitte is the name procurement teams supply unprompted, and choosing it for the SOC report is legitimate where Deloitte already audits your financials or FedRAMP and HITRUST accompany SOC 2. The ISO side sits outside the US practice, the work on both frameworks stays with your team, and no readiness date is committed.

### 9. KPMG

![](https://a-us.storyblok.com/f/1022609/1600x769/6f82aaa79f/best-pwc-competitors-08-kpmg.webp)

**Best for:** regulated financial services and insurance organizations that want a workshop-based readiness review mapped to ISO 27001 from a firm the board knows.

**Compliance Service Score:** 6.3/10

KPMG's readiness review is the one Big Four offering that explicitly maps SOC control objectives to ISO 27001 as part of the deliverable, which makes it relevant to a two-framework buyer even though the ISO certificate comes from a separate body.

The published description from a KPMG member firm lists workshops on the Trust Services Criteria, interviews and documentation review, sample controls, the ISO 27001 mapping, a review of the client's control proposal, and a management report with a roadmap.

#### SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Coverage

KPMG's IT attestation practice performs the SOC 1, SOC 2 and SOC 3 examinations. KPMG member firms also publish ISO 27001 implementation and certification-preparation services in three phases, with certification by an accredited body. The mapping in the readiness review gives the buyer a view of overlap; the two frameworks remain separate engagements.

#### Pricing and Engagement Model

Quote only, scoped by engagement. KPMG publishes no rates. Ask what the review costs, whether the ISO mapping extends into the implementation phase, and how the attestation and the external certification are priced separately.

#### What Stays On Your Team

The controls on both frameworks. KPMG's own description has the client proposing, implementing and evidencing them; the firm reviews the proposal and later tests the result.

#### Who Signs the Report

KPMG, as a licensed CPA firm, for the SOC report. ISO certificates come from a separate accredited body. Ask for the independence conclusion in writing where readiness and attestation come from the same firm.

#### Tradeoffs

KPMG fits regulated financial services and insurance organizations that want a roadmap already mapped to ISO 27001 and the SOC examination from a firm the board knows. The mapping is a diagram, not an operating model: the two frameworks are still two engagements, the road is yours to build, and neither date is committed.

## How We Built This Guide

The starting point was the buyer who needs SOC 2 and ISO 27001 both, because that is the buyer EY's pairing is built for.

Everything on this page is organized to answer what that buyer actually needs to know: whether one provider can cover both, what carries between them, who does the work on each, who signs each result, and whether anyone commits to a date.

The sources are the firms' own SOC and ISO 27001 pages and accreditation announcements, read in October 2026. Where a firm's ISO offering is published only by member firms, the entry says so. No firm publishes rates, so none are attributed; the market ranges in the pricing section come from third-party guides and are labeled as such.

Anything about a named firm that could not be sourced to that firm was turned into a question. Companies similar to EY named in third-party guides whose SOC 2 or ISO 27001 offering could not be confirmed from their own sites are not on this page.

EasyAudit was scored on the same seven criteria and weights as every other provider, and every provider carries the same scores on every page of this series.

## How To Choose Between EY and the Alternatives

Six questions for a two-framework buyer, each worth putting to EY as well.

### Step 1: Separate What the Provider Does From What Your Team Does

Ask for a written split on both frameworks: who writes the ISMS scope and Statement of Applicability, who writes the SOC 2 policies, who remediates on each, who collects evidence for the examination and again for Stage 2, and who talks to the auditor and the certification body.

Then ask for hours per week from your team in month two, for both. If "who fixes it" resolves to your engineer twice, that engineer is part of the price twice.

### Step 2: Confirm Who Will Sign the Report and Whether Independence Is Documented

The SOC report is signed by a licensed CPA firm; the ISO certificate is issued by an accredited certification body. A provider that prepares you and also signs or certifies has an independence question on each, and the answers are not interchangeable. Ask EY, and every EY competitor offering both, for both conclusions in writing. A provider that signs neither has removed both questions.

### Step 3: Ask What the Readiness Assessment Costs and What It Produces

Ask whether two frameworks means two readiness assessments, what each produces, and what share of the first framework's controls and evidence the second reuses. Most engagements rediscover the 60 to 80 percent overlap by hand. Then compare to the one option on this page that scores both frameworks free, on your real environment, with the report yours either way.

### Step 4: Map Every Framework You Will Need in the Next 24 Months

SOC 2 and ISO 27001 now, ISO 42001 if you ship AI features, NIST CSF 2.0 or CMMC for government-adjacent work. Ask each provider whether every added framework is a new engagement or a new mapping of the same controls and evidence. One control library that satisfies up to seven frameworks makes every framework after the first a mapping rather than a build.

### Step 5: Ask What Happens to the Work When the Engagement Ends

SOC 2 Type II renews annually; ISO 27001 runs a three-year cycle with two surveillance audits and recertification. Ask who is accountable for both programs between examinations, who detects a failing control in month seven, and who keeps the two frameworks in step. If the answer is your team, you bought two snapshots.

### Step 6: Put the Date and the Consequence in Writing

A committed readiness date for the SOC examination and one for Stage 2, and what the provider forfeits if either slips. Firms decline, because their fees are earned on delivering assessments and performing examinations regardless of your outcome.

EasyAudit locks the dates at signature and forfeits its fee if they are missed, with the boundary beside it: readiness and submission are guaranteed, and the auditor and the certification body determine their results.

## SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Readiness Pricing and Engagement Models in 2026

Two frameworks are priced three ways on this page, and the fastest way to tell the models apart is to count the invoices.

**Two readiness assessments, two examinations, each quoted.** EY, PwC, Deloitte, KPMG, Schellman, A-LIGN and Coalfire scope each framework's readiness and each framework's examination or audit as separate engagements, with BDO on the SOC side only.

Third-party guides put an external readiness assessment at $10,000 to $40,000 per framework depending on size, remediation help at $150 to $300 an hour, the SOC 2 Type II examination at $15,000 to $50,000 or more (low six figures for large enterprises with a Big Four firm, per Vanta's own SOC 2 cost guide), and ISO certification body fees at roughly EUR 8,000 to 30,000 for the audits alone across the three-year cycle, per UnderDefense's 2026 guide. The remediation on each framework is a further scope or your team's time.

**Certification quoted by one practice, readiness by another, SOC by a third party.** BSI Assurance quotes the ISO audits; BSI's consulting practice quotes implementation and SOC 2 readiness separately; a CPA firm you appoint quotes the SOC examination. Three parties, three invoices.

**One program, one investment, a fee at risk.** EasyAudit runs the Compliance Simulation free on your own environment, scores both frameworks, fixes one investment and the readiness dates at signature, and forfeits its fee if a date is missed. The SOC auditor's fee and the certification body's fees remain separate, because independent third parties issue the results.

### The questions two-framework buyers ask about price, answered

**"EY does both. Why not just use them?"** You may want to. Ask EY how many readiness assessments two frameworks means, what share of SOC 2 controls and evidence the ISO engagement reuses, and how independence is documented for both the attestation practice and CertifyPoint. Then compare on the dates and the total cost, including your team's hours on each framework.

**"Is ISO 27001 after SOC 2 a second project?"** With most providers, yes: a second readiness assessment and a second evidence collection, even though the overlap is 60 to 80 percent. With one control library it is a second mapping of the same controls and evidence, and the program carries 60 to 70 percent fewer controls than the two run in parallel.

**"How long will both take and what will they cost?"** In an advisory model each readiness assessment answers the first half for its framework after you have paid for it. The Simulation answers both halves for both frameworks on your own data before you sign, in about 75 minutes of scheduled time.

**"What happens between the SOC report and Stage 2, and after?"** With a firm, the program returns to your team between engagements. With EasyAudit, after the first audit, 3,950+ continuous monitoring checks keep both frameworks true between examinations and the named expert stays accountable through every surveillance audit.

**"We tried running both with a consultant and the ISO side stalled."** Two gap lists with one team behind them is the usual reason. The Simulation is a near-zero-risk diagnostic on your real environment for both frameworks, free, and if you proceed the work transfers to us and stays transferred.

### Engagement Model Comparison

| **Provider** | **Two-Framework Pricing** | **Model** | **Namedexpertleads** | **Policieswrittenfor you** | **Continuousmonitoring** | **Signs the report or certificate** | **Committedreadinessdate** |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| EasyAudit | Oneinvestmentfor bothframeworks, fixed at signature | Outcome-priced service | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Never. An independent auditor or certification body issues the result. | ✓ |
| A-LIGN | Eachframework's assessmentand audit quoted; A-SCEND free tier | Advisory andattestation | – | – | Add-on | ✓ | – |
| Coalfire | Eachframework's assessment, mock audit and audit quoted | Advisory andattestation | – | – | Add-on | ✓ | – |
| Schellman | Eachframework's assessmentquoted; concurrentexaminationquoted | Advisory (separateentity) andattestation | – | – | – | ✓ | – |
| BSI | ISOcertificationquoted; consultingquotedseparately; SOC via your CPA firm | Certification; separateconsulting | Add-on | Add-on | – | ISO only | – |
| PwC | SOCassessmentandexaminationquoted; ISO via member firms | Advisory andattestation | – | – | – | ✓ | – |
| BDO | Freeconsultationand estimate; SOC assessment and report quoted; no ISO | Advisory andattestation | – | – | – | SOC only | – |
| Deloitte | SOC readiness andattestationquoted; ISO via member firms | Advisory andattestation | – | – | – | ✓ | – |
| KPMG | Readinessreview andattestationquoted; ISO via member firms | Advisory andattestation | – | – | – | ✓ | – |

_As of October 2026. No firm in this comparison publishes rates; the market ranges above are attributed to_ _third-party guides. "Add-on" means the capability is available through a separate practice, entity or partner._ _"Named expert leads" means a named person owns the engagement outcome, not a rotating engagement_ _team. EasyAudit is not an audit firm or a certification body: it never signs, issues or attests to any report or_ _certificate, and no cell in this table should be read otherwise. An independent CPA auditor signs the SOC report_ _and an accredited certification body issues the ISO certificate in every EasyAudit engagement._

## Key Capabilities to Look for in a SOC 2 and ISO 27001 Readiness Provider

### 1. One Control Library Under Both Frameworks

If SOC 2 and ISO 27001 arrive as two control sets, the overlap between them is work your team does twice. Look for one library that both frameworks map into, so a control implemented once satisfies CC6.1 and A.8.5 at the same time and one evidence item serves both.

Ask for the percentage of controls and evidence that carry over; EasyAudit's program carries 60 to 70 percent fewer controls than the two frameworks run in parallel.

### 2. Readiness Scored for Both Frameworks Before You Commit

If you learn where you stand on ISO 27001 only after the SOC 2 engagement closes, you have scoped blind twice. Look for readiness scored per framework on your real environment, with gaps prioritized across both and a price and dates attached, before the contract. A free Simulation that produces that report removes the reason to pay for two assessments.

### 3. The ISMS Documents Produced, Not Templated

ISO 27001 requires a documented scope, a Statement of Applicability, a risk assessment, an internal audit and a management review, and a certification body cannot write any of them for you.

Look for a provider that drafts the scope from your connected systems and the Statement of Applicability from the control library, control by control, for your approval, and that states who performs the internal audit. Ask to see a Statement of Applicability the provider produced for a company with your stack.

### 4. One Accountable Person Across Both Cycles

If the SOC engagement team and the ISO engagement team are different people who both disband when their examination ends, month seven has two gaps and no owner. Look for a named expert who owns both frameworks between examinations, checks every piece of work, coordinates the auditor and the certification body, and answers to both dates.

### 5. Evidence Both an Auditor and a Certification Body Accept

If either examiner rejects the evidence, that framework's date moves. Look for approvals recorded with who and when, a trail enforced below the application layer so it cannot be bypassed, evidence traced to source systems rather than screenshots, and a read-only view for the auditor and the certification body so each looks through but cannot touch. Ask whether independent CPA auditors were involved in designing the evidence standards.

### 6. Two Dates, One Fee at Risk

If the provider is paid on delivering each assessment and performing each examination whether or not you were ready when it mattered, both timelines are advisory.

Look for readiness dates locked at signature for each framework and a stated consequence for missing them, with the boundary beside it: no one can promise the opinion or the certificate, and a provider that claims to should be questioned.

## Which Option Is Right for Your Organization?

If you want both frameworks examined by one specialist firm that holds CPA licensure and ISO accreditation, and you have a team to perform the remediation on each, A-LIGN or Schellman, with Schellman when the two must be examined concurrently and A-LIGN when cross-framework evidence reuse in a platform matters. Coalfire when SOC 2 pairs with a cluster of ISO standards.

If your customers require a Big Four name on the report or the certificate, ask EY, PwC, Deloitte and KPMG the six questions above and compare the answers.

EY pairs its attestation practice with EY CertifyPoint, a dedicated accredited body; PwC publishes the clearest SOC 2+ combined reporting and certifies ISO 27001 through an accredited PwC entity in some regions where independence allows; KPMG maps its readiness review to ISO 27001.

If the ISO certificate's issuer is what your customers check and SOC 2 can be handled separately, BSI; if the immediate need is the SOC report from a national CPA firm, BDO.

If you need both frameworks, nobody internal is going to run two readiness programs, and the overlap between them is work you would rather do once, choose the provider that runs one program on one control library, performs the work, and puts its fee behind the dates. That is EasyAudit. [Request a Demo](https://evnaro.co/demo) and compare on your own numbers for both frameworks.

## Is EasyAudit Worth It?

Measured against one readiness assessment on one framework, only if you intend to act on it. If a gap list is what you want and your team will carry the rest, an advisory engagement is the rational purchase.

Measured against two frameworks run the usual way, the answer changes. Add two readiness assessments. Add remediation hours on each, whether the firm's or your engineers'. Add the overlap between the two frameworks, rediscovered and re-evidenced by hand.

Add an annual SOC 2 report and a three-year ISO cycle with two engagement teams that disband when their examinations end, and the deal that waits on whichever framework is behind.

Across two frameworks, consultants and human-centric tools cost ten to a hundred times more manual hours than Autonomous Compliance, and none of them puts a fee at risk on either date.

EasyAudit is the right purchase when the outcome on both frameworks is what you are buying and running two programs is what you want to stop doing. The Simulation lets you check that on your own environment, for both, before spending a dollar. Compliance runs on someone's time. We changed whose.

"Our clients trust us with mission-critical models. EasyAudit helped us prove that security is built into our platform. SOC 2 opens the door to the next stage of our growth." Kirill Solodskikh, CEO, TheStage AI, EasyAudit customer.

## FAQs

### Who are EY's main competitors for SOC 2 and ISO 27001 readiness in 2026?

The other Big Four assurance practices (PwC, Deloitte, KPMG), national CPA firms such as BDO, specialist firms holding CPA licensure and ISO accreditation (A-LIGN, Schellman, Coalfire), certification bodies such as BSI, and readiness services such as EasyAudit that perform the work on one control library and never sign.

### Should we choose an auditor or a readiness provider first?

Readiness first. The auditor examines controls that have operated over a period, so choosing the firm before the work is done means paying it to list what is missing. Decide who performs the readiness work, then choose the auditor and certification body on their merits. A provider that never signs leaves every firm open.

### Can the same firm prepare us and sign our SOC 2 report?

Within limits. A CPA firm that designs and implements controls generally cannot attest to them where independence is impaired, so readiness scope must be bounded and the conclusion documented. For ISO 27001 a certification body cannot advise on the ISMS it certifies. Ask for both conclusions in writing.

### Is a specialist assurance firm as credible with enterprise customers as EY?

For the report itself, yes: any licensed CPA firm's SOC 2 opinion is valid, and specialists such as A-LIGN and Schellman issue thousands a year that enterprise procurement teams accept. Some customers ask for a Big Four name; ask the ones requesting your report which firms they have seen, and buy that recognition.

### How much should a SOC 2 or ISO 27001 readiness engagement cost?

No firm here publishes rates. Third-party guides put a readiness assessment at $10,000 to $40,000 per framework, remediation help at $150 to $300 an hour, the Type II examination at $15,000 to $50,000 or more, and ISO certification body fees at roughly EUR 8,000 to 30,000 per cycle. EasyAudit prices one program at signature.

### Can any provider guarantee that we will pass the audit?

No, and any that implies it should be questioned. The independent CPA auditor determines the SOC 2 result and the accredited certification body decides the ISO 27001 certificate, for every provider here. What EasyAudit guarantees is readiness: audit-ready and submitted by the committed date, or you do not pay.

## Next steps

- [Run the free Compliance Simulation](https://evnaro.co/compliance-simulation)
- [Estimate your cost with the Compliance Cost Calculator](https://evnaro.co/compliance-calculator)
- [Request a demo](https://evnaro.co/demo)

## Legal and trust

- [Privacy Policy](https://evnaro.co/privacy-policy)
- [Terms of Service](https://evnaro.co/terms-of-service)
- [Responsible Disclosure Policy](https://evnaro.co/responsible-disclosure)
- [Security & Trust Center](https://trust.easyaudit.ai)