Compare
Credo AI is a governance-framework platform — you bring the AI inventory, they help you map it across NIST AI RMF, ISO 42001 and the EU AI Act. GreyScape.ai is the AI governance platform that discovers your AI footprint, ships the EU AI Act register as working software, and tracks spend. For mid-market companies that don't have a Chief AI Officer and need results this quarter, GreyScape is the cleaner answer.
Pick GreyScape.ai if…
You don't yet have an AI inventory and you need one. You want shadow AI discovery + AI spend control + EU AI Act compliance + an audit trail in one self-serve platform at $3/user/month. Your buyer is IT, Finance, or a Compliance lead at a mid-market company — not a dedicated AI risk officer with a multi-million-pound governance programme.
Pick Credo AI if…
You're a large enterprise with a Chief AI Officer, an internal ML programme deploying proprietary models in production, and a governance committee that needs a deep model registry + multi-framework crosswalks across NIST AI RMF, ISO 42001, and sector-specific frameworks in parallel. The inventory work is already done.
Run GreyScape as your AI platform
Enterprises with internal-model ML programmes sometimes pair Credo's model registry with GreyScape.ai for the SaaS-AI discovery, spend, and EU AI Act execution layers. We cover the surface Credo doesn't reach (shadow AI tools across business units, billing reconciliation, working compliance workflows); they cover the internal-model lifecycle we don't.
✓ = built in. ~ = partial / via integration. – = not offered (as of June 2026).
| Capability | GreyScape.ai | Credo |
|---|---|---|
Shadow AI discovery (any tool, any browser) Detect AI tools employees use without IT knowing | ||
Browser-extension capture Per-user telemetry from any browser tab | ||
Card-feed + receipt parsing for AI vendors Find AI spend on company cards and personal expenses | ||
AI-vendor cost attribution (per-user $) Map every AI dollar to the person who spent it | ||
AI budgets at org / team / project scope Soft alerts at 75%, hard at 100% | ||
Anomaly detection for AI spend Catch a runaway loop before EOM | ||
Per-system risk classification (EU AI Act Annex III) Map each AI system to high / limited / minimal risk | ||
Obligation catalogue (Articles 4, 9-17, 26, 27, 49, 50, 71, 73) Per-system obligation register with status tracking | ||
FRIA (Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment) template Article 27 template + capture form | ||
Article 50 transparency triggers Detect AI systems requiring user-facing disclosure | ||
One-click audit pack export PDF / ZIP for market-surveillance authorities | ||
Approved-models policy + approval workflow Allowlist of permitted AI models + provisioning loop | ||
Tamper-evident audit log Cryptographic chaining (SHA-256, Postgres trigger) | ||
SIEM forwarding Per-stream cursor, failure-isolated webhook | ||
Self-serve signup at published price Launch in 5 min without a sales call | ||
14-day money-back refund No-questions exit, no sales call required |
Sources: vendor product pages, G2 reviews, public pricing pages as of June 2026. Anything wrong? Email [email protected] and we'll update.
Discovery — Credo is bring-your-own-data; we find what's actually running
Credo expects you to feed in the AI inventory and help govern it. We discover it: browser extension, card feeds, AI-vendor billing parsing, GitHub imports, network logs. The first week with GreyScape you typically uncover 3-5 AI vendors that were running off the radar. For mid-market companies, discovery is the missing first step Credo doesn't do.
EU AI Act as working software, not a framework presentation
Both claim EU AI Act mappings. We ship the working operational layer: per-system risk classification screen with Annex III lookups, obligation register with status tracking, evidence vault with file uploads (10MB cap), FRIA capture form, Article 50 transparency triggers triggered automatically, one-click audit pack PDF/ZIP. With enforcement in 53 days, working software beats a multi-framework crosswalk.
AI spend visibility — the layer Credo treats as someone else's problem
Per-user, per-vendor, per-token cost attribution. Org/team/project budgets that alert at 75% and block at 100%. Anomaly detection catches runaway loops before EOM. Credo is silent on spend. For most mid-market buyers, AI spend climbing 20-30% MoM is the loudest pain — and it's not addressed in Credo's product surface.
Approved-models policy + provisioning
Org-wide allowlist of which AI models employees can use, enforced through the browser extension and approval workflow. Service-account keys auto-issue on approval where the AI vendor supports it. Credo is the policy-and-review layer; we ship policy + enforcement + provisioning end to end.
Tamper-evident audit log + SIEM forwarding
Wave 8.5 shipped a cryptographically chained audit log — SHA-256 chain over each row via a Postgres trigger. Plus a webhook-style SIEM forwarder covering Splunk HEC, Sentinel, Elastic, Datadog, LogScale. Defensible evidence story for ISO 42001 and EU AI Act Article 12 that Credo's audit story doesn't match.
Self-serve at mid-market pricing
$3/user/month, published, self-serve, with a 14-day refund. Credo is enterprise-quoted; reports place annual contracts in the $40k-150k range. For a 100-seat mid-market team, GreyScape is about $3,600/year — Credo would be 10-40× more expensive, with a procurement cycle measured in months. Mid-market buyers don't have that budget or that time.
Narrow scenarios where the honest recommendation is them, not us. For the typical mid-market buyer wrestling with shadow AI, EU AI Act, and AI spend in one quarter, GreyScape.ai is the cleaner answer.
Internal-model registry and ML lifecycle depth
If your AI footprint is internally-trained ML models in production with versioning, lineage, model cards and drift tracking, Credo's registry depth fits that operating model better. Most mid-market companies aren't there — their AI footprint is SaaS-delivered tools across business units.
Multi-framework crosswalks across NIST AI RMF, ISO 42001, sector frameworks
Credo maps controls across multiple frameworks in parallel. Useful for an enterprise with a multi-jurisdictional compliance programme. For the typical EU-exposed mid-market buyer, getting the EU AI Act done in 53 days matters more than the crosswalk depth.
Bottom line
Credo AI is a framework platform for enterprises with a mature AI programme. GreyScape.ai is the AI governance platform that discovers your footprint, ships the EU AI Act as working software, and tracks AI spend — for mid-market companies that need results this quarter at a price that doesn't require board approval. If you don't have a Chief AI Officer, the answer is GreyScape.
Yes, for mid-market companies whose first AI governance problem is 'what AI is actually running here and how do we comply with the EU AI Act on time'. GreyScape ships discovery + working EU AI Act register + spend control + audit in one self-serve platform. Credo is deeper at the framework-mapping layer but bring-your-own-data; for the mid-market buyer without a dedicated AI risk officer, GreyScape is the cleaner pick.
Not in the way GreyScape does. Credo doesn't ship a browser extension, parse card feeds, or read AI-vendor billing — it assumes you bring the AI inventory in and helps you govern it. For mid-market companies who don't yet have an inventory, GreyScape's discovery is the missing first step.
No. Credo's product surface is governance frameworks — risk assessments, model registry, multi-framework crosswalks — not finance. AI spend visibility, per-user attribution, budgets, anomaly detection: those are GreyScape, not Credo.
Credo gives you the framework-mapping engine and crosswalks across multiple regimes. GreyScape ships the EU AI Act as a working operational layer: a per-system risk classification screen, an obligation register with status tracking, an evidence vault with file uploads, a FRIA capture form, Article 50 transparency triggers, a one-click audit pack PDF/ZIP. With enforcement in 53 days, working software wins.
GreyScape.ai is $3/user/month on Standard, published, self-serve, 14-day refund. Credo AI is enterprise-quoted; reports place annual contracts in the $40k-150k range. For a 100-seat mid-market team, GreyScape is about $3,600/year — Credo would be 10-40× the price and 3-6 months of procurement.
Five minutes from sign-up to a live workspace with the demo dataset. Connect AI-vendor billing accounts (OpenAI, Anthropic, GitHub) in another 10 minutes and you're on your real data. Credo requires a sales motion, security review, MSA, kickoff workshop — typically 3-6 months before you have a working register.
The demo workspace has seeded data — shadow AI findings, AI spend, budget alerts, compliance register — so you can click through GreyScape.ai in 5 minutes and decide.