Compare
Tracegence vs the alternatives.
Side-by-side against the two systems most QA teams are choosing between today: spreadsheets-and-email, and a generic doc-compliance SaaS.
| Spreadsheets + email | Generic doc-compliance SaaS | Tracegence | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Explainable rejection (cites the clause) | - | Sometimes | Always |
| Rulebook RAG (real corpus, not templates) | - | - | Yes |
| Cryptographic action chain | - | - | HMAC-signed |
| DB-trigger immutable audit log | - | App-layer only | Postgres trigger |
| Row-level security verified by CI | n/a | Untested | Gated on every PR |
| Per-tenant CMK | - | Enterprise tier only, opaque | Yes, documented |
| Supplier no-login upload | Yes | Yes (tokenised, race-safe) | |
| Predictive renewal & recall risk | - | - | Per-doc + per-supplier |
| Open API + webhooks | - | Limited | Versioned, signed |
| Time to first audit-grade upload | Weeks | Days | ~10 minutes |
Try it on your own document.
Spin up a tenant, upload a CoA, watch the engine cite the failing clause.