Fig Group vs traditional GRC platforms
Built differently for MSPs, SMBs, and UK compliance teams.
Enterprise GRC tools cost £30k-£500k, take months to deploy, and were never designed for MSPs or SMBs. Fig delivers the same compliance outcomes in 48 hours at a fraction of the cost, with multi-tenancy built in from day one.
The problem
Built for a different era, a different audience, and a different budget
Three structural reasons enterprise GRC fails MSPs and SMBs - each one independent of individual product quality.
Issue 01
Prohibitive cost
Enterprise GRC licences start at £30,000/year and can exceed £500,000 for large deployments. Add implementation consultancy (often £100,000+) and ongoing customisation fees. The total cost of ownership puts these platforms out of reach for MSPs and SMBs.
Issue 02
Months to deploy
Traditional GRC implementations take 3 to 12 months. Requirements gathering, custom configuration, data migration, user acceptance testing, and training all occur before the platform delivers any value. For MSPs who need to move quickly, this timeline is unworkable.
Issue 03
Wrong audience
Enterprise GRC was built for single organisations managing their own internal compliance. Multi-tenancy is either absent or an expensive add-on. MSPs need a platform that manages many client environments from a single pane, not a tool designed for one company at a time.
Feature comparison
How Fig compares to traditional enterprise GRC
Fourteen capability rows that usually change the buying decision - deployment time, cost, multi-tenancy, evidence automation, and what is bundled vs charged separately.
| Capability | Traditional GRC | Fig |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment time | 3-12 months | 48 hours |
| Annual cost | £30,000-500,000+ | Fraction of legacy cost |
| Target audience | Enterprise only | MSPs, SMBs, and enterprises |
| Multi-tenancy | Rare or bolt-on | Native, built-in |
| Frameworks supported | 10-30 (custom mapping) | 65+ out of the box |
| Evidence collection | Mostly manual | Automated via integrations |
| Vulnerability scanning | Separate tool required | Built in |
| Incident response | Separate tool required | Built in |
| Policy management | Often included | Included with version control |
| Security awareness training | Separate tool required | Built in |
| Implementation support | Expensive consultancy | Included onboarding |
| Ongoing configuration | Requires dedicated admin | Self-service |
| Reporting | Customisable but complex | Pre-built and automated |
| Insurance evidence packs | Not typically included | Built in |
Cost comparison
The true cost goes beyond the licence fee
Year-one totals include licence, implementation consultancy, additional tools that traditional GRC requires separately, and the partial FTE most enterprises allocate to administer the platform.
Year 1 · Traditional GRC
Multi-line procurement, multi-vendor stack
Year 1 · Fig
Single subscription, bundled capabilities
Choose honestly
Who should use what
Traditional GRC is the right tool for some buyers. Fig is the right tool for others. Match the requirement to the platform - not the other way round.
Best fit · Traditional GRC
Stay with enterprise GRC if
- You are a single large enterprise (1,000+ employees).
- You have a dedicated GRC team of 3+ people.
- You need highly customised workflow automation.
- Your budget exceeds £100,000/year for compliance tooling.
- You have 12+ months for implementation.
Best fit · Fig Group
Choose Fig if
- You are an MSP managing multiple client environments.
- You are an SMB that needs compliance without enterprise overhead.
- You need to be operational in days, not months.
- You want vulnerability scanning, IR, and training included.
- You need multi-tenancy as a core feature, not an add-on.
- You value automation over manual processes.
Common questions
Frequently asked questions
What is a traditional GRC platform?
Traditional GRC (Governance, Risk, and Compliance) platforms are enterprise software systems designed to manage regulatory compliance, risk assessment, and governance processes. Examples include ServiceNow GRC, Archer (by RSA), MetricStream, and SAP GRC. These platforms are typically sold to large enterprises, require months of implementation, and cost between £30,000 and £500,000+ annually depending on scope and licensing.
Why are traditional GRC platforms not suitable for MSPs?
Traditional GRC platforms were designed for single-entity enterprises managing their own internal compliance. They lack native multi-tenancy, meaning MSPs cannot efficiently manage dozens or hundreds of client environments from a single instance. The deployment timeline (3-12 months), cost structure, and administrative complexity make them impractical for managed service providers who need to onboard clients quickly and scale efficiently.
How can Fig cost so much less than enterprise GRC tools?
Fig is purpose-built for MSPs and SMBs, which means the product does not carry the overhead of enterprise customisation, consulting-heavy implementation, or legacy architecture. Fig automates evidence collection through native integrations instead of relying on manual processes. And Fig includes capabilities (vulnerability scanning, incident response, training) that traditional GRC platforms require you to purchase separately from third-party vendors.
Can Fig handle enterprise-scale compliance requirements?
Yes. Fig supports over 65 compliance frameworks including ISO 27001, SOC 2, NIS2, DORA, GDPR, CMMC, and Cyber Essentials. The platform scales from a single SMB to large MSP practices managing hundreds of client environments. The difference is not capability but approach: Fig achieves enterprise-grade compliance without enterprise-grade complexity or cost.
What does 48-hour deployment actually mean?
It means your Fig instance is fully configured and operational within 48 hours of starting onboarding. This includes connecting your integrations (RMM, PSA, identity providers, cloud platforms), configuring your first client environments, mapping compliance frameworks, and importing existing policies. By contrast, traditional GRC deployments involve months of requirements gathering, customisation, testing, and training before the platform is usable.
Should we consider Fig if we already have a GRC tool?
If your current GRC tool meets your needs and your organisation can justify the ongoing cost and administrative overhead, there may not be an immediate reason to switch. However, if you find that your GRC tool requires significant manual effort, does not support multi-tenancy for client management, lacks built-in vulnerability scanning or incident response, or costs more than the value it delivers, Fig is worth evaluating as a modern alternative.
Next step
See the difference for yourself.
Book a 30-minute demo and we will show you how Fig delivers enterprise-grade compliance at a fraction of the traditional GRC cost and timeline.