Credo AI alternative

A risk score is not evidence of what happened.

Credo AI governs your AI programme as a portfolio — policies, risk registers, assessments. If what you need is proof of what a specific agent actually did, that is a different job, and this page is the honest comparison.

The two jobs

Governing a programme, recording an agent.

Both get called AI governance. Only one of them can answer a question about a specific action on a specific day.

Portfolio governance

Scores whether your AI programme is well managed.

Risk registers, policy mapping, self-reported assessments across every model and use case a company runs. Bought by a risk or governance committee that needs a view across the whole portfolio. Credo AI lives here.

Answers: is our AI programme under control?

A system of record

Proves what one agent did.

Every model call, tool call, decision and approval, written as it happens into a record where a later edit is computable. Bought by whoever has to answer a regulator, an auditor, or a customer's security review. Auditant is this.

Answers: what did it do, and who allowed it?

Most teams that need one eventually need both. Neither replaces the other, and this page is not trying to talk anyone out of a policy tool they already rely on.

What to ask before switching

Five questions that separate them.

Ask these of Credo AI, of us, and of anyone else in the category. The answers sort it faster than a feature list.

What does it hold?
Credo AIA risk register and policy assessments for your AI systems as a portfolio.
AuditantA sealed record of every action a specific agent took, one entry per action.
Where does the evidence come from?
Credo AIAnswers your team enters — self-reported assessments and questionnaires.
AuditantInstrumented from the agent's own calls, written as they happen.
Can it stop an action?
Credo AINo — it scores and reports on a review cycle, after deployment.
AuditantA rule evaluates before the action executes, and the refusal is recorded too.
Who has to trust whom?
Credo AIThe reader trusts your team's self-assessment.
AuditantNobody. An offline verifier checks the record without an account.
What do you hand an auditor?
Credo AIA policy document and a risk score.
AuditantA single file that verifies what happened, independent of us.
Asked honestly

What people actually want to know.

Including where Credo AI is the right tool and we are not.

What it costs →
01Is Auditant a Credo AI alternative, or something different?
Different, for most of what Credo AI does. It is a genuine alternative for one specific job: if what you actually need is proof of what an agent did, not a risk assessment of your AI programme, Auditant is built for exactly that and Credo AI is not.
02What does Credo AI actually do well?
Policy and risk-register tooling across an AI portfolio — mapping models and use cases against a framework, tracking assessments, giving a risk committee something to review. That is a real, different job from recording what one agent did on one afternoon.
03Can we run both?
Yes, and many teams will end up doing exactly that — a portfolio-level policy tool for the risk committee, and a system of record for what actually happened when regulators or customers ask. They answer different questions for different readers.
04Why do people search for a Credo AI alternative?
Usually because a specific incident or audit asked a question their assessment tool cannot answer — what did this agent do, to this customer, on this day — and a policy score was not evidence.
05Does switching mean losing our existing assessments?
No migration is needed either way. Auditant does not replace a policy register; it starts recording agent actions going forward, independent of whatever governance tooling already tracks your policies.
Start

Record it before anyone asks.

Two lines in one agent, free while you evaluate. Or open the demo — it needs no account.

Start freeSee it live
  • No card to start
  • Nothing is blocked until you say so
  • Your proof stays yours if you leave