C1 vs Veza
ILM Reference editors · Editorial assessment · Published 2026-09-28
Veza scores higher overall on our weights: 69/100 against 63/100 for C1. C1 wins two of the seven criteria (JML automation and pricing transparency) and Veza wins five (disconnected-app coverage, orphan and local account discovery, certification campaign depth, audit evidence and works alongside existing IdP and IGA). On disconnected-app coverage, the heaviest-weighted criterion, Veza leads 65 to 55.
Scores are an editorial assessment of public vendor material. See Editorial method.
How do C1 and Veza score on each criterion?
| Criterion (weight) | C1 | Veza | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disconnected-app coverage (22) | 55 | 65 | Veza |
| Orphan and local account discovery (18) | 60 | 80 | Veza |
| JML automation (15) | 78 | 72 | C1 |
| Certification campaign depth (12) | 75 | 78 | Veza |
| Audit evidence (13) | 65 | 70 | Veza |
| Works alongside existing IdP and IGA (12) | 70 | 75 | Veza |
| Pricing transparency (8) | 30 | 20 | C1 |
| Lifecycle coverage score | 63 | 69 | Veza |
Read the reasons for each score
- Disconnected-app coverage
- C1: Baton open-source connectors and C1 Bridge for on-prem systems; apps with no connector are not described in detail.
- Veza: Reveals accounts that exist outside identity platforms; custom systems connect through the Open Authorization API.
- Orphan and local account discovery
- C1: 'Find what offboarding missed', plus shadow app signup and login detection.
- Veza: Detects dormant accounts and reveals local, machine and service accounts.
- JML automation
- C1: HR systems and directories trigger join, role change, leave and departure workflows.
- Veza: Birthright access, role-change and offboarding automation, including local accounts, with Dry Run and Safety Limits.
- Certification campaign depth
- C1: Automated user access reviews as part of AI-native identity governance.
- Veza: Access certification campaigns prioritized by risk, with effective permissions in plain terms.
- Audit evidence
- C1: Records each offboarding action; framework evidence export not described.
- Veza: Audit logging for lifecycle actions; no framework-specific evidence export described on the pages reviewed.
- Works alongside existing IdP and IGA
- C1: Connects to existing IdPs and HR systems rather than replacing them.
- Veza: Integrates with Okta and HR sources and adds visibility beside existing IdP tooling.
- Pricing transparency
- C1: Publishes the pricing structure (Platform or Flex, Pro or Advanced, 1,000 to 20,000 identities) but no prices.
- Veza: No public pricing.
What does each tool do?
Identity governance with JML automation, access reviews and open-source Baton connectors, now branded C1.
Category Identity governance and administration (IGA)
Builds an Access Graph of effective permissions across 325+ integrations and runs reviews and lifecycle actions on top of it.
Category Access graph and governance
How do C1 and Veza compare on pricing and deployment?
How do they handle disconnected applications?
| Tool | Discovery of the app | Account data collection | Leaver action on the app | Method described | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Veza | Not documented | Documented accounts outside identity platforms, custom systems via OAA | Documented offboarding including local accounts | Access Graph integrations and OAA | Source: veza.com lifecycle and access reviews pages · Reviewed Sep 2026 |
| C1 | Partial shadow app signup and login detection | Partial Baton connectors, C1 Bridge for on-prem | Not documented for apps with no connector | Open-source connectors | Source: c1.ai · Reviewed Sep 2026 |
Source: veza.com lifecycle and access reviews pages · Reviewed Sep 2026
Source: c1.ai · Reviewed Sep 2026
Which should you choose?
Choose C1 if HR-driven joiner, mover and leaver automation is the priority, or if you need a published price to model the budget before a sales call.
Identity governance with JML automation, access reviews and open-source Baton connectors, now branded C1.
Choose Veza if finding orphan, dormant and local accounts is the priority, or if you need coverage for applications with no connector, no SCIM endpoint and no SSO integration.
Builds an Access Graph of effective permissions across 325+ integrations and runs reviews and lifecycle actions on top of it.
Weights change the answer. Try your own in the calculator.
FAQ
Which is better for identity lifecycle management, C1 or Veza?
On our rubric Veza scores 69/100 and C1 63/100. Veza is ahead mainly on orphan and local account discovery and disconnected-app coverage. Buyers who weight JML automation more heavily may prefer C1; the calculator shows how the order changes.
Which handles disconnected applications better, C1 or Veza?
Veza scores 65 to 55 on disconnected-app coverage. C1: Baton open-source connectors and C1 Bridge for on-prem systems; apps with no connector are not described in detail. Veza: Reveals accounts that exist outside identity platforms; custom systems connect through the Open Authorization API.
Do C1 and Veza publish pricing?
C1: Structure published, prices scoped by quote. Veza: Not published. Contact sales.
Keep reading
Sources
- c1.ai
- c1.ai lifecycle
- c1.ai shadow IT
- c1.ai pricing
- veza.com lifecycle management
- veza.com access reviews
- veza.com
Reviewed Sep 2026