CPA firms that understand model versioning as change management, training data access as evidence, subprocessor boundaries for LLM providers, and when ISO 42001 belongs beside SOC 2.
Free and anonymous. 3–10 quotes in 48 hours. One call, not five.
For AI companies, Thoropass covers SOC 2 and ISO 42001 on one CPA engagement from $15K, Zero Day CPA is the economical SOC 2 pick without the ISO 42001 bundle from $5K, and Schellman fits high-scrutiny AI control mapping from $20K. We track 22 firms with documented AI experience; listed timelines start at 1 week.
Five AI picks for SOC 2 plus ISO 42001, an economical credentialed boutique, established AI practices, Drata-native specialists, and enterprise multi-framework scope.
Zero Day CPA is the economical pick for an AI startup that needs SOC 1/2/3 and HIPAA from a credentialed boutique rather than a full ISO 42001 bundle. Audit managers each bring 5+ years at a Big Four or major national firm, so buyers get enterprise-grade rigor at fixed pricing from around $5K and a 2 to 6 week turnaround.
Thoropass is the pick for an AI startup that wants SOC 2 and ISO 42001 under one CPA engagement. Owns the GRC platform, audits both frameworks, and fixed-fee pricing aimed at under-200-employee AI companies.
Schellman is the pick when buyer scrutiny is high and your AI controls need a brand-name CPA on the cover. Published methodology for AI in SOC 2, Top 50 CPA, with depth in cloud and ML platforms.
Consilium Labs is the pick for Drata-native AI companies that want a specialist firm explicitly listing AI Companies and ISO 42001 in scope. Structured, evidence-based engagements with multi-framework coverage and fixed-fee pricing.
A-LIGN is the pick for enterprise AI vendors selling into regulated industries that need SOC 2 alongside HITRUST, FedRAMP, or ISO. One of the highest-volume US SOC 2 practices runs the framework stack under one engagement.
| Use case | Firm | From price | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|
| economical AI startup SOC 2 without the ISO 42001 bundle | Zero Day CPA | $5k | 2–6 wk |
| AI startup needing SOC 2 and ISO 42001 under one CPA | Thoropass | $15k | 2–9 wk |
| established AI audit practice with SOC 2+ AI controls mapping | Schellman | $20k | 3–12 wk |
| Drata-native AI / multi-framework (SOC 2 + ISO 42001 + ISO 27001) | Consilium Labs | $15k | 2–6 wk |
| mid-market or enterprise AI multi-framework | A-LIGN | $15k | 3–12 wk |
Choose SOC 2 first when US enterprise security review is the immediate blocker. Add ISO 42001 when procurement needs a formal AI management system, especially for regulated or European buyers. A combined engagement can reuse evidence, but only a provider with the right CPA and ISO credentials can issue both valid outputs.
SOC 2 covers the security controls around your product and data. ISO 42001 addresses the management system governing how AI risk is identified, owned, measured, and reviewed. If you are still deciding what belongs in the audit boundary, our SOC 2 implementation guide for AI companies maps model workflows and AI infrastructure to the Trust Service Criteria.
A procurement-ready scope names the AI services customers actually rely on, the customer and training data they touch, and the controls governing model changes, access, monitoring, and incidents. It should also make the boundary between your application and external LLM providers explicit, because a provider's SOC 2 report does not cover your implementation.
Ask the auditor how the system description will explain prompts, context stores, embeddings, model registries, evaluation gates, and output handling. The goal is not to stuff every AI practice into SOC 2. It is to make the report understandable to a buyer assessing the risks your product creates.
Pay for AI specialization when model behavior changes customer risk, regulated data enters prompts or training pipelines, or buyers ask detailed AI-governance questions. A generalist can still fit a conventional SaaS product with a narrow AI feature, provided the auditor can clearly scope subprocessors, data flows, and change management.
Test the distinction before signing. Give each finalist one real workflow and ask what evidence they would sample, what stays outside the SOC 2 boundary, and whether they would recommend base SOC 2, SOC 2+ AI criteria, or ISO 42001. Concrete answers reveal more than an AI industry badge.
One engagement can produce a strong procurement package when its outputs match the buyer's request: usually SOC 2 Type 2, sometimes paired with ISO 42001 or added AI criteria. It cannot turn one credential into another. Confirm the report type, observation period, ISO certification authority, and final deliverables in the proposal.
Also ask how exceptions will be explained to customers and whether the firm will support procurement follow-up after issuance. The most useful auditor is not merely familiar with AI terminology; it can produce evidence and language that your security team can defend in a real buyer review.
Independent directory. Not owned by any audit firm or compliance platform; we take no cut of audit fees and charge nothing per lead.
Firms listed here name AI, ML, or LLM as an industry they serve, or they are accredited ISO 42001 certification bodies. Profile pages show pricing, timelines, and framework coverage. Pricing is in USD and timelines are in weeks.
Type 1 and Type 2 figures reflect a mix of firm-confirmed numbers, public sources, and our own estimates, refreshed periodically. Actual cost depends on company size, scope, and Trust Service Criteria.
Featured firms pay to appear first. Every firm here qualified on editorial fit; payment cannot add a firm or change its facts.
No firms match that filter. Clear it to see every firm on this page, or get matched anonymously instead.
Tell us your scope once. We match it with firms that understand AI company audits and send 3–10 ballparks back side by side.
We match firms to your scope and bring their ballpark quotes back. Free and anonymized.
AI companies still need baseline security controls, but model deployment, training data, prompt handling, LLM providers, and ISO 42001 can change the evidence plan.
A generalist can audit the cloud controls. A specialist knows how to evaluate model governance without inventing custom criteria that buyers cannot interpret.
| Factor | AI-specialised | Generalist |
|---|---|---|
| Model versioning | Mapped to change management | Often ignored |
| Training data access | Evidence scoped | Generic access review |
| LLM providers | Subprocessor boundary clear | Vendor list only |
| ISO 42001 | Bundle possible | Referred out |
| Best fit | AI, ML, LLM, regulated AI | Simple SaaS with AI feature |
Five AI-specific areas that should map back to familiar SOC 2 evidence instead of becoming a vague side questionnaire.
Model versions, evaluation gates, deployment approvals, rollback procedures, and release logs can all map to change-management evidence.
Auditors need evidence for who can access training data, prompts, context stores, embeddings, logs, and customer data passed to AI providers.
OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, vector databases, and observability tools are subprocessors. Their SOC 2 reports cover their boundary, not your application layer.
Specialist firms may reference OWASP LLM Top 10 or similar practices while still mapping controls to SOC 2 criteria buyers understand.
ISO 42001 becomes relevant when buyers ask for formal AI governance. SOC 2+ AI can be lighter when buyers want AI criteria in a familiar report format.
AI scopes start near $3K for Type 2, then rise when ISO 42001, SOC 2+ AI criteria, regulated data, or extra Trust Service Criteria are in scope.
$15-70K
$10-50K
$8-20K
180-420 hrs
Five questions specific to SOC 2 vs ISO 42001, AI control evaluation, dual-scope auditors, LLM provider reports, and SOC 2+ AI.
SOC 2 reports must be issued by licensed Certified Public Accountants under AICPA standards. ISO 42001 certification is a separate credential and does not replace SOC 2 attestation.
Confirm both sides of a dual-scope promise: CPA authority for SOC 2 and accreditation or partner coverage for ISO 42001. Shared evidence is useful only when both outputs are valid.
Pricing estimates and timelines are approximations based on public information and submitted data. Actual cost varies by model risk, data scope, buyer requirements, and framework bundle.
Tell us your model workflow, training data boundary, buyer requirements, and ISO 42001 interest. We route it to AI-fluent firms that can scope the real engagement.
Run an audit firm? See how firms get found and shortlisted here — how it works →
Menu