Can we run SOXHub and Prova in parallel through our AuditBoard contract tail?

Yes — and it is the recommended migration pattern. Most AuditBoard customers are locked into multi-year contracts, and mid-contract cutover is rarely worth the procurement friction. Run SOXHub through the tail for historical continuity while Prova begins producing agent-tested evidence for the access review and change management control families. At renewal, the CFO has a concrete comparison of evidence quality and controller-hours consumed to support the decision. Typical parallel-operation window: 3-9 months aligned to the AuditBoard renewal date.

Our Big 4 engagement team knows SOXHub — will they accept Prova evidence?

Every Prova design-partner engagement includes a walkthrough dry-run with the customer's external audit partner (Big 4 or regional) before year-end commitment. If the audit team rejects the evidence format, the engagement terminates and the legacy stack remains the fallback — that is Cohort 1's explicit guarantee. To date, design-partner audit teams from Deloitte, EY, BDO, RSM, Grant Thornton, and Baker Tilly have accepted the SHA-256-signed evidence format. The four-characteristic AS 2201 §.39 alignment (authenticity, completeness, source reliability, reperformability) is designed specifically to pass Big 4 walkthrough scrutiny.

What does the cost difference look like for a 650-emp PE portco?

A representative 650-emp PE portco with NetSuite + Sage Intacct + ~40 custom controls moved from SOXHub to Prova lands the following: SOXHub replacement ACV $175,000; Prova year-one ACV $36,000 (includes implementation + walkthrough dry-run); net first-year savings $139,000. Second year steady-state Prova ACV typically runs $28,000-$42,000 depending on control-population growth. The full cost model is shared in the Prova CTA download — including sensitivity analysis on multi-ERP surcharge and external audit firm type.

Does Prova support the consolidated-filings ICFR reporting AuditBoard does?

For the 300-1,500 emp tier that is Prova's ICP, yes — parent-level consolidation across 3-12 subsidiaries with per-entity control scoping and materiality-weighted deficiency rollup. For the 5,000+ emp multinational with 30+ legal entities and multi-jurisdiction consolidated-filings needs (SAB 108 cross-period analysis, 10-K bundling, segment-level ICFR), SOXHub's depth remains stronger and Prova is not the right answer. The cut-point is roughly 15 legal entities or a $2B+ consolidated revenue threshold.

What happens to our AuditBoard walkthrough memos and deficiency history?

They import into Prova's evidence store as historical walkthrough records with original authorship preserved. The external audit partner sees the complete historical chain — SOXHub-era walkthrough memos through cutover, then Prova-produced evidence going forward — with no audit trail discontinuity. Deficiency history imports as a first-class record so remediation status tracking continues uninterrupted across the platform boundary.

How does Prova handle SAB 108 error analysis the way SOXHub does?

SAB 108 (SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, cross-period error analysis) is a restatement-trigger workflow more than a continuous control, so Prova supports it through the walkthrough-memo surface rather than as an agent-tested control. For public filers with a history of SAB 108 events or a restatement-risk flag from the external auditor, Prova's SAB 108 workflow is adequate but less mature than SOXHub. Most PE portcos and pre-IPO customers do not have active SAB 108 history; public microcaps with restatement exposure should treat this as a Phase 2 gap.

Comparison · SOX Platform

Prova vs AuditBoard SOXHub

The category-defining enterprise SOX platform — deep workflow, Big 4 familiarity, and pricing structurally aimed at 2,000+ employee public filers with mature internal audit functions.

Request a design partner slot See all comparisons

AuditBoard SOXHub price range

$100,000 – $250,000+ ACV (enterprise-quoted, not published). Mid-market quotes in the 300 – 1,500 employee band routinely land at $150k – $220k for SOXHub alone.

Best fit for AuditBoard SOXHub

Large public filers with $1B+ revenue, a 5+ person internal audit team, and an existing Big 4 engagement. AuditBoard's depth across risk register, walkthroughs, SAB 108 error analysis, and consolidated-filings ICFR reporting is genuinely best-in-class for that profile.

Where Prova differs

AuditBoard's SOXHub was designed for the pre-LLM era when control testing required an army of auditor-hours. Its pricing, implementation cadence, and CSM motion assume a 5+ person IA team; at a 3-person audit function running 10-50 custom controls across NetSuite + Sage Intacct + SAP B1, Controllers routinely pay for 20-30% of the feature surface. Continuous agent-driven testing is not the paradigm — announced AI features post the $4.4B Hg acquisition in 2024 remain assistive, not agentic.

Head-to-head on ten buyer dimensions

How Prova compares on what the Controller actually evaluates

Dimension	AuditBoard SOXHub	Prova
Time to first control test	3-6 months. Standard implementation: risk register configuration, control matrix import, narrative tagging, walkthrough setup, testing cadence, deficiency workflow. Dedicated CSM and implementation consultant required.	1-2 weeks from contract signature. Agent begins pulling access-review and change-management signals against the documented control library on day 3-5; first signed evidence record lands inside two weeks.
PCAOB AS 2201 audit-evidence quality	Strong. Mature SAB 108 treatment, consolidated 10-K support, full deficiency-to-material-weakness evaluation under §.50. Evidence is attachment-based (screenshots, spreadsheet uploads) but auditors have normalized that format.	Equivalent or stronger against AS 2201 §.39 four characteristics. SHA-256 authenticity, continuous-population completeness (vs. sample-of-25), read-only source reliability, preserved-reasoning reperformability. Dry-run walkthroughs with Cohort 1 design partners' Big 4 + regional audit firms are part of the engagement.
Works at sub-$500M revenue (microcap) price point	Structurally difficult. SOXHub's entry ACV plus implementation plus CSM lands between $150k-$250k for the 300-1,500 emp band. The CFO cannot defend that line item against microcap G&A economics.	Yes. $1,000-$5,000 per month per entity. A 650-emp PE portco or a sub-$500M revenue public microcap typically lands at $24k-$45k ACV — roughly one-tenth of a comparable SOXHub quote.
Agent-driven control walkthroughs	Not native. Announced AI features (post-Hg acquisition) are assistive — evidence-request suggestions, narrative drafting, deficiency clustering. The walkthrough memo is still produced by a human auditor.	Native. The agent reasons about observed access and change activity against the control objective, produces pass/fail per execution, and emits a walkthrough-ready summary. A human control owner still signs off, but the auditor-hours collapse by an order of magnitude.
Multi-ERP support (NetSuite + Sage Intacct + SAP B1)	Supported — but via integration modules priced separately, and the evidence stream does not normalize across ERP sources automatically. Multi-ERP portcos report manual reconciliation during consolidation.	Designed for multi-ERP from day one. NetSuite + Intacct integrated at launch; SAP B1 + Dynamics 365 via generic SQL/API with structured evidence schema. Parent-level reporting normalizes evidence regardless of subsidiary ERP.
Quarterly attestation cycle throughput	Quarterly testing cadence with ~30-40% of ITGC reviewed per quarter at full-population sampling requires the IA team to own ~2,400-3,800 testing hours/year (FEI Controllers Survey benchmark).	Continuous testing at full-population coverage, not sampled. Quarterly attestation becomes a sign-off review on evidence the agent has already produced. Typical IA hours savings: 60-75% against the traditional baseline.
PE portco fit	Structural mismatch. Sponsor margin pressure + portco operating-partner G&A discipline cannot absorb $150k+ ACV. Most PE portcos running SOXHub inherited it from a pre-acquisition public company phase.	Primary ICP. Pricing, implementation, CSM, and walkthrough dry-run are all scoped for the PE portco buying committee (Controller + IA Director + CFO + operating partner awareness).
Price at 3-person audit team	Roughly $50,000-$65,000 per IA FTE-equivalent per year. The 3-person team is paying for AuditBoard headcount-equivalents it does not use.	Roughly $8,000-$15,000 per IA FTE-equivalent per year. Designed for the 3-person IA team as the steady-state staffing model — not as a downmarket exception.
Integration with external audit firm workpapers	Mature and Big 4-recognized — a real moat. Deloitte, EY, KPMG, PwC audit teams know the SOXHub UI and export formats cold.	Evidence is exportable in the same walkthrough summary / sample-of-one narrative / full population test report / deficiency evaluation formats Big 4 and regional firms expect. Cohort 1 includes walkthrough dry-runs with design partners' audit firms for format-acceptance validation.
ITGC testing automation depth	Partial. Evidence-request automation, narrative templates, deficiency clustering. Testing itself (user access review, change management, backup completion, job scheduling, incident handling) is still executed through human-assisted workflows.	End-to-end. Access review, change management, SoD at the entitlement level, backup-completion evidence, job-scheduling logs, and vendor-access review all produced by the agent against live source-system data. Human control owner signs off on the produced evidence rather than running the test.

Pricing ranges are approximate public-facing signals and design-partner reported quotes. AS 2201 references are to the current PCAOB Auditing Standard No. 5 (AS 2201) covering audits of internal control over financial reporting.

Honest assessment

When AuditBoard SOXHub is the right call.

AuditBoard SOXHub wins decisively for the 2,000+ employee public filer with $1B+ revenue and a mature internal audit function. If the internal audit department has five or more full-time staff and the SOX program already runs quarterly testing cycles with dedicated walkthrough owners per control family, SOXHub's depth across risk register, walkthrough orchestration, SAB 108 error analysis, and consolidated-filings ICFR reporting is genuinely best-in-class. The mid-to-large cap public filer environment is what AuditBoard optimized for over a decade, and the Big 4 familiarity with SOXHub's evidence format is a real moat that reduces walkthrough friction with Deloitte, EY, KPMG, and PwC engagement teams.

SOXHub also wins when the audit committee has already standardized on AuditBoard for multiple audit committee deliverables — internal audit, risk assurance, compliance, and ESG reporting — and the incremental cost of the SOX module is absorbed by the broader platform contract. Fortune 1000 audit committees that view AuditBoard as the canonical GRC layer get real leverage from the single-vendor, consolidated-dashboard positioning.

If your reality is a 5,000-employee Fortune 500 with a 12-person internal audit team, existing AuditBoard Risk + AuditBoard Audit Management, and a Big 4 engagement team that has specifically requested SOXHub evidence format for the year-end walkthrough — SOXHub is the correct answer. Do not switch.

Where Prova wins

When Prova is the decisive answer.

Prova wins where SOXHub's pricing and implementation cadence break against the structural reality of sub-$500M revenue companies and PE portfolio companies. If the internal audit function is 2-4 people, the annual SOX testing budget is $300k-$800k all-in (people + platform + external audit prep), and the Controller is defending each platform line item to the CFO every January — the SOXHub ACV is not defensible. At roughly one-tenth the ACV for equivalent PCAOB AS 2201 evidence quality, Prova converts the SOX platform conversation from a seven-figure capital-light program to a departmental line item.

Prova wins decisively on time-to-first-control-test. A PE portco that signs in March needs evidence for the Q2 quarterly attestation; SOXHub's 3-6 month implementation window misses the Q2 review. Prova's 1-2 week time-to-first-test means the Q2 attestation signs off on agent-produced evidence rather than a spreadsheet-and-SharePoint patchwork. For microcap public filers facing 404(a) or 404(b) attestation against a regional audit firm (BDO, RSM, Grant Thornton, Baker Tilly, CohnReznick), that delta is existential.

Prova also wins on the agent-driven testing paradigm itself. SOXHub's announced AI features since the $4.4B Hg acquisition remain assistive — narrative drafting, evidence-request suggestions, deficiency clustering. The fundamental control-test labor unit is still human hours. Prova collapses that unit by roughly an order of magnitude for the 30-45% of mid-market ICFR controls that are agent-testable today (access review, change management, ITGC baseline, SoD at the entitlement level), which is why the price structure works without sacrificing the AS 2201 §.39 evidence bar.

Migration notes

Moving from AuditBoard SOXHub to Prova

AuditBoard-to-Prova cutover structures around a quarter boundary (Q1 or Q3 typically) with 4-6 weeks of parallel evidence collection to preserve the audit trail. Prova imports SOXHub's historical evidence (walkthrough memos, test-of-design documentation, test-of-operating-effectiveness workpapers, deficiency-tracking history) so the external audit partner sees a single consistent stream across the cutover. Most customers run AuditBoard through the contract tail and displace entirely at renewal; the parallel-evidence approach avoids the "two SOX platforms, one attestation" awkwardness auditors dislike. Total cutover effort: 80-120 hours of the Controller's + IA Director's time across the 4-6 week parallel window.

Questions specific to the AuditBoard SOXHub comparison

What buyers ask when evaluating Prova against AuditBoard SOXHub

Can we run SOXHub and Prova in parallel through our AuditBoard contract tail?: Yes — and it is the recommended migration pattern. Most AuditBoard customers are locked into multi-year contracts, and mid-contract cutover is rarely worth the procurement friction. Run SOXHub through the tail for historical continuity while Prova begins producing agent-tested evidence for the access review and change management control families. At renewal, the CFO has a concrete comparison of evidence quality and controller-hours consumed to support the decision. Typical parallel-operation window: 3-9 months aligned to the AuditBoard renewal date.
Our Big 4 engagement team knows SOXHub — will they accept Prova evidence?: Every Prova design-partner engagement includes a walkthrough dry-run with the customer's external audit partner (Big 4 or regional) before year-end commitment. If the audit team rejects the evidence format, the engagement terminates and the legacy stack remains the fallback — that is Cohort 1's explicit guarantee. To date, design-partner audit teams from Deloitte, EY, BDO, RSM, Grant Thornton, and Baker Tilly have accepted the SHA-256-signed evidence format. The four-characteristic AS 2201 §.39 alignment (authenticity, completeness, source reliability, reperformability) is designed specifically to pass Big 4 walkthrough scrutiny.
What does the cost difference look like for a 650-emp PE portco?: A representative 650-emp PE portco with NetSuite + Sage Intacct + ~40 custom controls moved from SOXHub to Prova lands the following: SOXHub replacement ACV $175,000; Prova year-one ACV $36,000 (includes implementation + walkthrough dry-run); net first-year savings $139,000. Second year steady-state Prova ACV typically runs $28,000-$42,000 depending on control-population growth. The full cost model is shared in the Prova CTA download — including sensitivity analysis on multi-ERP surcharge and external audit firm type.
Does Prova support the consolidated-filings ICFR reporting AuditBoard does?: For the 300-1,500 emp tier that is Prova's ICP, yes — parent-level consolidation across 3-12 subsidiaries with per-entity control scoping and materiality-weighted deficiency rollup. For the 5,000+ emp multinational with 30+ legal entities and multi-jurisdiction consolidated-filings needs (SAB 108 cross-period analysis, 10-K bundling, segment-level ICFR), SOXHub's depth remains stronger and Prova is not the right answer. The cut-point is roughly 15 legal entities or a $2B+ consolidated revenue threshold.
What happens to our AuditBoard walkthrough memos and deficiency history?: They import into Prova's evidence store as historical walkthrough records with original authorship preserved. The external audit partner sees the complete historical chain — SOXHub-era walkthrough memos through cutover, then Prova-produced evidence going forward — with no audit trail discontinuity. Deficiency history imports as a first-class record so remediation status tracking continues uninterrupted across the platform boundary.
How does Prova handle SAB 108 error analysis the way SOXHub does?: SAB 108 (SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, cross-period error analysis) is a restatement-trigger workflow more than a continuous control, so Prova supports it through the walkthrough-memo surface rather than as an agent-tested control. For public filers with a history of SAB 108 events or a restatement-risk flag from the external auditor, Prova's SAB 108 workflow is adequate but less mature than SOXHub. Most PE portcos and pre-IPO customers do not have active SAB 108 history; public microcaps with restatement exposure should treat this as a Phase 2 gap.

Company-stage context

Read the AuditBoard SOXHub comparison in your company-stage context.

Long-form analysis related to AuditBoard SOXHub.

Compare Prova against other tools

Evaluating other options? Here are the other comparisons.

Design partner program · Cohort 1

Request a design partner slot.

Cohort 1 is 8 to 12 design partners — PE portcos in the 300 to 1,500 employee band, public microcaps running 404(a) or 404(b), and regional audit firms adopting agent-produced evidence in walkthroughs.

Design partners get concierge onboarding, a dry-run walkthrough with your external audit partner before year-end, and founder-level access to the roadmap. In exchange we ask for 60 minutes every two weeks.

We will only email you about Prova. No newsletter list, no tracking pixels, no shared contact data.