Comparison
Why CRAReady, Not a SBOM Tool + Spreadsheet?
CRA compliance requires more than vulnerability scanning or bill-of-materials generation. It demands a complete compliance program: assessment, regulatory escalation, evidence management, and deadline automation.
Start Your Free AssessmentThe Gap in the Market
Every vendor in the space—Snyk, FOSSA, Black Duck, even GitHub's native scanning—solves one part of the CRA puzzle. But CRA is a regulatory program, not a single technology problem. It spans assessment, scanning, incident reporting, evidence management, and ongoing monitoring.
Manufacturers typically end up stitching together 4–5 tools:
- • A scanning tool (Snyk, GitHub, or similar)
- • A license manager (FOSSA or Black Duck)
- • A spreadsheet for assessment and tracking
- • A document repository for technical files
- • Email alerts for deadline reminders
By the time you've integrated all those, you've built a compliance system. CRAReady is that system, ready to use.
Detailed Feature Matrix
Compare CRAReady to every major alternative across 50+ compliance capabilities
| Feature / Capability | Snyk | FOSSA | Black Duck | Spreadsheet + Snyk | CRAReady |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CRA Assessment & Planning | |||||
| CRA Applicability Assessment | — | — | — | ⚠ | ✓ |
| Product Classification (Default/Class I/II/Critical) | — | — | — | ⚠ | ✓ |
| Conformity Assessment Route Mapping (Module A/B+C/H) | — | — | — | ⚠ | ✓ |
| Risk Assessment Framework | — | — | ⚠ | ⚠ | ✓ |
| SBOM & Components | |||||
| SBOM Generation (CycloneDX/SPDX) | ⚠ | ✓ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
| GitHub Repo Integration | ✓ | ⚠ | ⚠ | — | ✓ |
| ZIP File Upload | — | ✓ | ⚠ | — | ✓ |
| Scheduled SBOM Scans | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
| Component Change Tracking & Diffs | ⚠ | ⚠ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
| SBOM History & Versioning | ⚠ | ⚠ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
| Vulnerability Management | |||||
| Vulnerability Scanning (NVD, OSV, GitHub, EUVD) | ✓ | ⚠ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
| EPSS Risk Scoring | ⚠ | — | ⚠ | — | ✓ |
| VEX (Vulnerability Exploitability) Management | ⚠ | — | ⚠ | — | ✓ |
| Custom Threat Feeds | — | — | ✓ | — | ✓ |
| Vulnerability Triage & Assignment | ✓ | — | ⚠ | — | ✓ |
| Patch Tracking & Remediation Workflow | ⚠ | — | ⚠ | — | ✓ |
| Article 14 Incident Reporting | |||||
| 24h/72h/14d Deadline Calculation | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Automatic Deadline Alerts | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Early-Warning Report Building | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Detailed Incident Report Building | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Final Incident Report Building | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| CSAF v2.0 Advisory Generation | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| ENISA Report Submission Workflow | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Compliance Evidence & Operations | |||||
| Technical File Management (Annex VII) | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Risk Assessment Documentation | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Design Documentation Repo | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Test Reports & Certification Tracking | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| CE Marking Checklist | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| EU Declaration of Conformity Generator | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Harmonised Standards Mapping | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Standards Update Tracking | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Retention Deadline Tracking (3–5 years) | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Team & Access Management | |||||
| Role-Based Access Control | ✓ | ⚠ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
| Compliance Officer Dashboard | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Developer Workflow Integration | ✓ | ⚠ | ✓ | — | ⚠ |
| Pre-Built Compliance Checklists | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Task Assignment & Tracking | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Audit & Reporting | |||||
| Full Audit Logs (CRUD + auth events) | ⚠ | ⚠ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
| Compliance Evidence Export | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Regulatory Report Generation | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Retention Deadline Compliance Report | — | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Pricing & Packaging | |||||
| SME-Friendly Entry Point (< £100/mo) | ⚠ | ✓ | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Per-Product Pricing Available | ⚠ | ⚠ | — | — | ✓ |
| No Enterprise-Only Gatekeeping | ⚠ | ✓ | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Transparent Tier Definitions | ✓ | ✓ | ⚠ | — | ✓ |
| Annual Discount Available | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
Why Each Tool Falls Short
Even excellent tools leave gaps. Here's the reality of each major alternative.
Snyk: Built for Developers, Not Compliance Officers
Strengths
- Fast vulnerability feedback in CI/CD
- Developer-friendly experience
- Real-time scanning in IDE
- Strong on application vulnerabilities
CRA Gaps
- Doesn't know Class I vs Critical
- No Article 14 workflows
- No CSAF v2.0 export
- No technical file management
- No retention deadline tracking
The CRA Question: Snyk answers "What vulnerabilities are in our code?" but compliance officers ask "Are we CRA-compliant?" These are completely different questions.
FOSSA: Licensing Is Only Half the Battle
Strengths
- Excellent OSS license compliance
- Clean SBOM generation
- Supply chain visibility
- Good for OSS governance
CRA Gaps
- No vulnerability scanning
- No Article 14 escalation
- No CRA classification
- No CE marking
- No regulatory deadline tracking
The CRA Question: FOSSA solves "What open source are we using?" but CRA adds "Is that open source a security risk that needs ENISA reporting?" FOSSA's scope ends at the first question.
Black Duck: Overkill for Most, Built for the Biggest
Strengths
- Powerful component analysis
- Handles 10,000+ components
- Enterprise security features
- Complex supply chains
CRA Gaps
- No CRA applicability assessment
- No Article 14 reporting
- Expensive (£10K–50K+/year)
- Not for SMEs
- No compliance checklists
The CRA Question: Black Duck is built for Fortune 500 companies. CRA applies to 5-person teams building mobile apps. Also, Black Duck doesn't know about regulatory workflows—it scans and scores, but it doesn't know about Article 14 deadlines.
Spreadsheet + Snyk: The DIY Approach That Falls Apart
Why Teams Do It
- Low initial cost
- Flexibility
- Familiar tool (everyone knows Excel)
Why It Falls Apart
- Scaling nightmare (15+ products)
- Deadlines get missed (no automation)
- Evidence disappears (no audit trail)
- Collaboration breaks down
- Regulators hate spreadsheets
The Cost:
- • Snyk: £200–5,000/year
- • Free spreadsheet: But 40+ hours/year of compliance team time
- • One missed Article 14 deadline: £20,000+ fine per incident
Five Reasons Manufacturers Choose CRAReady
End-to-End Compliance
From assessment to CE mark: one platform. All 18 capabilities. No switching between systems. No export/import cycles.
See the workflowDeadline Automation
Never miss an Article 14 deadline. Automatic 24h/72h/14d calculation. Alerts at 20h, 48h, 7d, 12d. Reports auto-populate.
How it worksSME-Friendly Pricing
£49/month entry point. No enterprise-only gatekeeping. Transparent tiers. A startup and a 500-person manufacturer both get the full platform.
See pricingCompliance as Evidence
Full audit logs. Every action timestamped: who assessed this product? When? What data did you have? Export audit trail. Regulators see a system, not a spreadsheet.
Learn moreSupply Chain Ready
CRA applies to importers and distributors too. Supplier checklists, economic operator tracking, SBOM validation templates, compliance attestation requests.
WorkflowsUsed by 200+ EU Manufacturers
CRAReady powers compliance operations for startups to enterprise organizations across SaaS, IoT, hardware, and mobile app verticals.
"We were using Snyk for vulnerability scanning and a Google Sheet for compliance tracking. Our compliance officer spent 40% of her time manually updating spreadsheets and tracking deadlines. We switched to CRAReady and cut that to 10% of her time. Same security rigor, vastly less admin."
Sarah M., Compliance Officer
EU-based IoT Manufacturer (50+ products)
Average time saved per compliance officer: 30–40 hours per month by eliminating manual spreadsheet tracking, deadline reminders, and evidence gathering.
Ready to Simplify Your Compliance?
If you're currently stitching together Snyk + FOSSA + spreadsheets + email reminders, CRAReady consolidates all of that into one platform. No more context switching. No more missed deadlines.
5-minute questionnaire. See your compliance roadmap. No credit card. No commitment.