Matproof vs Hyperproof: EU-First Specialist vs US Generalist GRC Platform

Introduction

Most compliance teams at European financial institutions start their platform search on G2 or Gartner. They find Hyperproof near the top of the list, see the broad framework coverage, and assume the job is done. What they overlook is a structural problem: Hyperproof was designed for a US regulatory environment. Its architecture, data handling, audit workflows, and default control mappings all reflect American compliance priorities. For a bank in Frankfurt or an insurance company in Amsterdam, this creates a gap that no amount of customisation can fully close.

The gap matters because European financial regulation is becoming more prescriptive, not less. DORA (Regulation (EU) 2022/2554) introduced binding requirements for ICT risk management, incident reporting, and third-party oversight that have no direct equivalent in US law. NIS2 (Directive (EU) 2022/2555) expanded the scope of cybersecurity obligations across essential and important entities. And GDPR enforcement continues to intensify, with the European Data Protection Board reporting a 40% increase in cross-border cases since 2024. Choosing a compliance platform that treats EU regulations as an afterthought is not just inconvenient -- it is a measurable business risk.

This article provides a direct, feature-level comparison of Matproof and Hyperproof. It examines framework coverage, EU data residency, pricing structures, and the practical question of which platform is the better fit depending on your organisation's location, industry, and regulatory obligations.

Quick Comparison Overview

Framework Coverage

Hyperproof supports over 70 regulatory frameworks, which sounds impressive on paper. The platform covers SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI DSS, FedRAMP, CMMC, and dozens of other standards. For US-based organisations managing multiple American frameworks simultaneously, this breadth is a genuine advantage. Hyperproof's control cross-mapping feature allows teams to satisfy overlapping requirements across frameworks without duplicating work.

However, breadth comes at the expense of depth when it comes to EU-specific regulations. Hyperproof does not offer a native DORA framework. Financial institutions subject to DORA must build custom control sets, manually map them to Articles 5-15 (ICT risk management), Articles 17-23 (incident reporting), and Articles 28-44 (third-party risk management). This is not a trivial exercise. DORA alone contains over 100 specific requirements that must be tracked, evidenced, and reported to national competent authorities.

Matproof takes the opposite approach. Rather than covering 70+ frameworks at surface level, it focuses on the five frameworks that matter most to European financial services: DORA, ISO 27001, SOC 2, NIS2, and GDPR. Each framework is mapped at the article and control level. DORA controls link directly to the regulatory text -- for example, the ICT risk management framework requirements under DORA Article 6(1) map to specific Matproof controls with pre-configured evidence requirements. This means compliance teams spend their time collecting evidence and closing gaps rather than building framework structures from scratch.

For NIS2 specifically, Matproof includes controls aligned with the directive's requirements for risk management measures (Article 21) and incident reporting obligations (Article 23), including the 24-hour early warning and 72-hour incident notification timelines. Hyperproof has no pre-built NIS2 framework as of early 2026.

EU Compliance & Data Residency

Data residency is not a preference for European financial institutions -- it is a regulatory requirement. GDPR Article 44 restricts transfers of personal data to third countries unless specific safeguards are in place. Following the Schrems II ruling (Case C-311/18) and the subsequent EU-US Data Privacy Framework, the legal basis for transatlantic data transfers remains contested and subject to ongoing legal challenges. For financial institutions, supervisory authorities like BaFin and the EBA expect that compliance-related data, including audit evidence, risk assessments, and incident reports, is processed within the EU.

Matproof hosts all data exclusively in German data centres. There is no optional US region, no data mirroring to non-EU locations, and no reliance on international data transfer mechanisms. This provides a straightforward answer to any regulator or auditor asking where compliance data resides: Germany, full stop. For institutions subject to DORA Article 28(2), which requires financial entities to ensure that ICT third-party service providers comply with applicable data protection rules, this is a significant simplification.

Hyperproof's infrastructure is US-based. While the company may offer certain data processing commitments, the platform was not designed with EU data residency as a foundational principle. For European financial institutions, this introduces a layer of legal and operational complexity. Compliance teams must evaluate whether Hyperproof's data handling meets the requirements of GDPR Chapter V, assess the adequacy of any transfer mechanisms, and document this analysis for supervisory authorities. This is additional compliance work generated by the compliance tool itself.

Beyond data residency, Matproof's approach to EU compliance extends to practical details. Policy templates are available in both German and English, reflecting the bilingual reality of many European compliance programmes. Audit workflows are pre-configured for the reporting structures expected by BaFin, the EBA, and EIOPA. Incident reporting templates align with DORA's mandatory notification timelines. These are not features that a US-centric platform can replicate through localisation patches.

Pricing & Value

Hyperproof uses custom, quote-based pricing that varies by organisation size, number of frameworks, and feature set. Published estimates suggest starting prices around EUR 1,800 per month for mid-sized organisations, scaling significantly for enterprise deployments. The platform's broad framework coverage means that organisations paying for Hyperproof are also paying for dozens of frameworks they may never use, such as FedRAMP, CMMC, or StateRAMP.

Matproof's pricing is structured around the needs of European financial services organisations, starting at approximately EUR 1,500 per month. The pricing model includes all five core frameworks (DORA, ISO 27001, SOC 2, NIS2, GDPR) without per-framework surcharges. Automated evidence collection, endpoint monitoring, and AI-powered policy generation are included in the standard package rather than gated behind enterprise tiers.

The total cost of ownership calculation should also account for hidden costs. With Hyperproof, European organisations often need to invest in additional consulting to build custom DORA and NIS2 frameworks, configure EU-specific audit workflows, and address data residency concerns. These implementation costs can add EUR 15,000-40,000 to the first-year investment. With Matproof, EU-specific frameworks and workflows are available out of the box, reducing implementation time from months to weeks.

Who Should Choose What

Choose Hyperproof if:

• Your organisation is US-headquartered or primarily subject to US regulatory frameworks (SOC 2, HIPAA, FedRAMP, CMMC).
• You need to manage a large number of US-centric compliance frameworks simultaneously and benefit from Hyperproof's cross-mapping capabilities.
• EU data residency is not a binding requirement for your compliance programme.
• You have the internal expertise and budget to build custom frameworks for DORA and NIS2.

Choose Matproof if:

• Your organisation is a European financial institution (bank, insurance company, payment provider, fintech) subject to DORA.
• EU data residency is a regulatory requirement or a strong preference driven by your supervisory authority.
• You need native DORA and NIS2 support without building custom framework mappings.
• You want compliance policies generated in German and English with audit workflows aligned to BaFin and EBA expectations.
• You are a mid-market organisation that needs depth in EU frameworks rather than breadth across US standards.

The decision is not about which platform is objectively better. It is about regulatory geography. If your compliance obligations are rooted in EU law, a platform built for EU law will serve you more effectively than one adapted from a US foundation.

The Bottom Line

Hyperproof is a capable GRC platform with genuine strengths in US framework coverage and cross-compliance mapping. For American organisations managing SOC 2 alongside FedRAMP or HIPAA, it is a strong choice. But for European financial institutions operating under DORA, NIS2, and GDPR, Hyperproof's US-centric architecture creates friction at every level: data residency, framework coverage, audit workflows, and regulatory reporting.

Matproof exists precisely because European financial services compliance has distinct requirements that cannot be met by localising a US product. With 100% EU data residency, native DORA and NIS2 frameworks, bilingual policy generation, and audit workflows designed for European supervisory authorities, it provides the infrastructure that EU compliance teams actually need. The question is not whether Hyperproof is a good platform. It is whether it is the right platform for your regulatory reality.

For a free assessment of your current compliance posture and how Matproof can support your DORA and NIS2 obligations, visit matproof.com/contact.

FAQ

Does Hyperproof support DORA compliance out of the box?

No. As of early 2026, Hyperproof does not include a native DORA framework. Organisations subject to DORA must build custom control mappings and evidence requirements manually or through consulting engagements. Matproof includes a pre-built DORA framework mapped to all relevant articles, including ICT risk management (Articles 5-15), incident reporting (Articles 17-23), and third-party risk management (Articles 28-44).

Can I use Hyperproof and still meet EU data residency requirements?

This depends on your specific regulatory obligations and the data transfer mechanisms you put in place. Hyperproof's infrastructure is US-based, which means European organisations must assess compliance with GDPR Chapter V and document appropriate safeguards. For financial institutions where BaFin or other supervisory authorities expect EU-resident data processing, this introduces additional compliance overhead. Matproof eliminates this concern entirely by hosting all data in German data centres.

Is Hyperproof cheaper than Matproof?

The base subscription costs are comparable, with Hyperproof starting slightly higher at approximately EUR 1,800/month versus Matproof's EUR 1,500/month. However, the total cost of ownership for European organisations is typically higher with Hyperproof due to the need for custom DORA/NIS2 framework development, EU-specific workflow configuration, and data residency compliance documentation. These implementation costs can add EUR 15,000-40,000 in the first year.

Can Matproof handle SOC 2 and ISO 27001 in addition to DORA?

Yes. Matproof supports five core frameworks: DORA, ISO 27001, SOC 2, NIS2, and GDPR. All five are included in the standard pricing with full control mapping, automated evidence collection, and cross-framework overlap detection. This multi-framework approach is designed for European financial institutions that must satisfy both EU-specific regulations and internationally recognised standards like ISO 27001 and SOC 2.