Finance AI Index
Index Tax and compliance Internal controls › FloQast vs Hyperproof
Internal controls and SOX · September 2026 Edition

FloQast vs Hyperproof

Eight of twelve models named FloQast first on the direct prompt; zero named Hyperproof. FloQast was named by ten of the twelve models and Hyperproof by eight and FloQast carries 14 labels and Hyperproof 16, so the shares are not directly comparable.

FloQast

accepted challenger

Named in ten categories this edition.

Hyperproof

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share18%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%12%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#5A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels1416A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, FloQast reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.AuditBoard was named alongside these two in seven of the twelve direct answers. AuditBoard vs FloQast · AuditBoard vs Hyperproof · FloQast vs Diligent One Platform

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the Internal controls and SOX page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
FloQastFirst choices, of twelve modelsHyperproof
Direct80
Paraphrase02
Comparative00
Budget-constrained002 against Hyperproof
Scale-constrained00
Negative00
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.

Every model, every framing

The seventy-two answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where FloQast and Hyperproof stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
FloQast Hyperproof first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, FloQast on the left and Hyperproof on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where FloQast and Hyperproof stood in it.

FloQast first, Hyperproof an alternative

8 of 12 modelsHyperproof was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Perplexity SonarFloQast alternatives: AuditBoard, Optro
Grok 4.1 FastFloQast alternatives: AuditBoard, Onspring, VComply
Mistral SmallFloQast alternatives: HighRadius, Optro
DeepSeek V4 FlashFloQast alternatives: AuditBoard, Hyperproof, Onspring, Workiva
Llama 4 MaverickFloQast alternatives: HighRadius, Onspring
Kimi K2FloQast alternatives: AuditBoard, Onspring, Workiva
GLM 4.7 FlashXAuditBoard, FloQast alternatives: Hyperproof, Mitti, NAVEX One, Workiva
MiniMax M2.5FloQast alternatives: Diligent One Platform, Optro, VComply

Neither was the first choice, one was named

3 of 12 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5AuditBoard alternatives: FloQast, Optro, Scytale
Gemini 3.5 FlashOptro alternatives: FloQast, Hyperproof, Scytale, Workiva
Qwen 3.7 FlashOnspring alternatives: Hyperproof, Scytale

Neither was named

1 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniWorkiva alternatives: AuditBoard, LogicGate Risk Cloud

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Hyperproof leads by four points.
Hyperproof10%#2 of 13
FloQast6%#– of 13
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
The order flips: FloQast leads at mid-market.
FloQast18%#2 of 13
Hyperproof4%#5 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
FloQast leads by four points.
FloQast4%#– of 11
Hyperproof0%#– of 11
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about FloQast

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. One of one in this category shown.

“For most mid-market B2B companies going through their first SOX cycles, FloQast offers the best balance of usability and value.” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice

What the models said about Hyperproof

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of six in this category shown.

“quote-based platforms (e.g., Drata ~$7.5K-$25K/year, Hyperproof $12K+)” Grok 4.1 Fast · budget prompt · soft negative
“Hyperproof: ~$41,000/year ... you should avoid them” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“For a mid-sized B2B company, Hyperproof is the best balance of cost, ease of use, and feature depth.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“LogicGate or Hyperproof are the strongest value picks” DeepSeek V4 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“If the IT Security / Engineering team owns ITGCs and you also need SOC 2: Go with Hyperproof or Scytale.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · alternative
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.