Attestly vs Holistic AI

Both come up in EU AI Act tool searches, but they solve different problems — Holistic AI is built around assessing your AI, Attestly around documenting what a specific agent did.

Holistic AI is an enterprise AI governance platform covering full lifecycle oversight: discovering AI systems across your org (including unsanctioned "shadow AI"), bias and algorithmic risk auditing, compliance monitoring, and policy enforcement, mapped to the EU AI Act, NIST RMF, and ISO 42001. Bias and fairness auditing is its strongest, most distinct capability. Pricing is enterprise custom, not published. Independent reviews from earlier in 2026 described its AI Act conformity-assessment workflows as still in beta and its Annex IV documentation as requiring significant manual input — worth confirming directly with Holistic AI, since that may have changed.

Attestly doesn't do discovery or bias auditing at all. It only generates Annex IV documentation, only for AI agents, reading your agent's actual runtime traces (OpenTelemetry, LangSmith, AgentOps, MCP logs) and drafting the monitoring and human-oversight sections directly from that evidence — each sentence links back to the trace event behind it. Pricing is published, with a free tier.

Where each one fits better

If bias and fairness auditing across a broad AI estate — discovery, risk scoring, policy enforcement — is the priority, Holistic AI's depth there is something Attestly doesn't offer at all.

If the job is specifically Annex IV documentation for an agent, backed by its real run history instead of manual write-up, with pricing you can see upfront, that's Attestly's lane. See why trace-sourced evidence matters for Annex IV specifically.