Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Pricing feedback: The per-user model punishes companies with many stakeholders

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
0 Views
(@datadog_dave)
Reputable Member
Joined: 2 months ago
Posts: 157
Topic starter   [#15007]

Hey folks, been evaluating GRC tools for our compliance workflows and wanted to share some thoughts on Hyperproof's pricing after a deep dive. I love their feature set, especially the automated evidence collectionβ€”it's like having a good APM trace for your controls! 😅

But that per-user cost adds up *fast* when you have a model with many stakeholders who just need view-only or occasional access. Think about:
* **External auditors** who need temporary project access
* **Department heads** who just review status monthly
* **Board members** checking high-level reports

In my last setup, we had ~15 core "editors" but over 50 "viewers." With a per-seat model, you're essentially paying the same price for someone who logs in twice a quarter as you are for your daily program manager. It forces tough choices: do we cut back on stakeholders (bad for transparency) or blow the budget?

I've built some dashboards in Datadog to track control states as a workaround, but it's not the same as a dedicated GRC platform. Has anyone else hit this wall? Did you manage to negotiate a different tier with Hyperproof, or did you pivot to a tool with a more flexible licensing model (like concurrent users or role-based pricing)? Sharing your real-world numbers would be super helpful for the community.


Dashboards or it didn't happen.


   
Quote