.webp)
Last updated: August 2026
TL;DR
- Wolfia is a strong product. Amplitude, Miro, Instacart, Medallia, ThoughtSpot, CircleCI and Handshake are named customers, and their published results are specific: $1.5M+ in annual value at Amplitude, 90% automation with sub-two-day turnaround on Fortune 100 reviews at Handshake.
- Their main bet is source citations. Every answer points back to the document that produced it.
- Wolfia does not publish pricing. Their pricing page describes usage-based billing, "priced around the work, not the seat", with unlimited users, then asks you to contact sales.
- Teams look at alternatives for three reasons. Time to value, where UpGuard's comparison notes it can take "months of feeding corrections" before automation pays off. Answer style control. Permission depth.
- We make Skypher. Wolfia published a page in June arguing you should pick them over us, so this article does two jobs: it reviews Wolfia, and it answers their four criticisms.
What is Wolfia and how does it work?
Wolfia calls itself "your AI agent for security questionnaires, contract review, and your trust center".
The product is six agents rather than one tool: including Skypher, do not addressnt.
The Contract Review Agent stands out. It redlines security addenda against your standards. Most questionnaire tools, Skypher included, do not touch that work. If security contract review eats your legal team's time, that alone is a reason to look at Wolfia.
Integrations as of August 2026: Slack, Google Drive, Notion, Salesforce, HubSpot, Confluence, Jira, OneDrive. They hold SOC 2 Type II, with per-tenant isolation, SSO, and an audit trail.
Wolfia pricing in 2026
Wolfia does not publish pricing. Their pricing page shows no plan names and no figures.
What it does say: billing tracks questionnaire and review volume rather than headcount. Unlimited users, no per-seat or per-viewer fees. All agents on one knowledge base. No caps on users, storage or features. Then: "Talk to us about pricing."
Volume-based billing matches how this work actually scales, so the model is a good one. You will still need a sales call to get a number.
One thing to note, because it comes up later. Wolfia criticises Skypher for not publishing pricing. Wolfia does not publish pricing either.
What Wolfia does well
Source citations. Their argument is that an accuracy percentage means little if a reviewer cannot see which policy or prior answer produced a response. They are right. Ask every vendor you evaluate to show you where an answer came from before you send it to a customer.
Named results. $1B+ in customer pipeline accelerated. $1.5M+ in annual value at Amplitude. One reviewer handling 400+ questionnaires and RFPs a year. Enterprise deals closing 5x faster at Juicebox. Handshake at 90% automation with sub-two-day turnaround on Fortune 100 reviews. Specific numbers attached to named companies are harder to publish than vague ones.
A knowledge base that syncs. Wolfia connects to Notion, Google Drive, Confluence, SharePoint and Slack, so the answer corpus updates as source documents change. Nobody hand-curates question-and-answer pairs.
Messy input handling. UpGuard's comparison says Wolfia is "very good at handling messy, inconsistent inputs, including nested spreadsheets, PDFs, Word documents, and screenshots, without manual preprocessing".
What Wolfia says about Skypher, and our response
Parts of it are fair. They concede that Skypher "is strong at parsing messy questionnaire formats, RFPs, and DDQs", that "Skypher's format detection is a genuine strength", that "the reviewer-in-the-loop workflow is sensible", and that "the built-in trust center is useful for teams that want one source of content".
They raise four criticisms. Here is each one straight.
On pricing opacity
Their words: "With no public number, building a business case means scheduling demos."
They are right. Skypher does not publish pricing. If you need a budget figure before taking a call, that is friction.
Their article describes Wolfia's pricing as "flat and all-inclusive". Their pricing page publishes no figure.
Both companies quote on volume, so this is a criticism of the category rather than of one vendor in it.
Ask both of us for a number, and ask what happens to it as your volume grows.
On G2 review volume
Their words: "That is normal for a fast-growing product, but it matters."
Our G2 review count is thin relative to our customer base. That is ours to fix.
The context their article leaves out: Wolfia has no G2 rating at all. UpGuard's 2026 comparison of the category lists Wolfia as "Currently not rated", next to Conveyor at 4.6 from 150 reviews and HyperComply at 4.3 from 12.
If third-party review volume is a criterion for you, apply it evenly.
On source citations
Their words: "An accuracy percentage means little if a reviewer cannot quickly see which policy, report, or prior answer produced a given response." Correct, and worth pressing every vendor on.
To be accurate about what they wrote, their article also says: "Both cite sources; Skypher highlights the source sentence, so compare citation depth side by side." They are not claiming Skypher lacks citations. They are asking for a depth comparison, which is reasonable.
Skypher answers carry source citations and confidence scores, with the source sentence highlighted.
Above a configurable confidence threshold, Skypher reuses a previously approved answer word for word instead of regenerating it, so language a reviewer already signed off does not get quietly rewritten. Wolfia runs hallucination-prevention checks before answers leave the system.
,
Both approaches hold up. Run the same questionnaire through both and look at where the citation actually lands.
On portal coverage
Their words: "portal gaps quietly erase the time savings the AI is supposed to deliver."
Right question. We are not going to pretend the answer favours us here.
Skypher integrates with 40+ questionnaire platforms including OneTrust, ServiceNow, Archer, Ariba and Coupa. Wolfia claims 45+. On published numbers they are slightly ahead, and both of us are well ahead of most of the category.
Portals are 19.2% of all questionnaires by our data. Ask both vendors for the current supported list and check that your largest buyers' portals appear on it. That beats either headline number.
The main Wolfia alternatives in 2026
Skypher. Questionnaire automation across every format buyers send, with a trust center on the same knowledge base. 40+ portal integrations, answer style control, role-based access control. Adobe, Deel and McKinsey are customers.
Conveyor. The most established dedicated player, with public pricing from $9,600 a year and consistently praised support. Best if you want a budgetable number without a sales call. Our Conveyor review covers it.
SafeBase (Drata). The most mature trust center in the category, acquired by Drata for $250 million in February 2025. Best if the trust center is the primary job. See our three-way comparison.
Loopio and Responsive (RFPIO). RFP platforms that treat security questionnaires as one document type among many. Best if RFPs are the larger workload. See our Loopio alternatives guide.
Vanta and Drata. Compliance automation with questionnaire features attached. Worth it only if you
need SOC 2 monitoring too.
How Skypher compares to Wolfia
We make security questionnaire automation software, so read this section accordingly.
This is a closer comparison than most in the category. Two things are level, and two are real differences. We would rather say that than invent gaps.
Where we are level
Format handling. Wolfia's article concedes Skypher's format detection is "a genuine strength". UpGuard says Wolfia handles nested spreadsheets, PDFs, Word documents and screenshots without preprocessing. Both are strong.
Portal coverage. 40+ for Skypher, 45+ claimed by Wolfia. Effectively level.
Time to value
UpGuard names this as Wolfia's main limitation: "the upfront investment in system training before automation pays off. It might take months of feeding corrections and authoritative answers before
reaching high automation and trusting the output."
Skypher indexes your existing security content on ingest. Past questionnaires, policies, reports, connected sources. There is no training period before the first draft.
Ask both vendors the same question during evaluation. What does the first questionnaire look like, and what does the tenth look like? The gap between those answers is your real onboarding cost.
Answer style control
Skypher gives you three answer styles: short answer, precise, and a custom prompt written against your own communication guidelines. An agent inside the questionnaire rewords individual answers in place, so you can adjust one response without regenerating the rest.
Security teams give the minimum necessary, because more detail invites more follow-up questions. An answer that is correct but three times longer than what your team would send still costs you an edit.
Controlling the output at generation time removes that edit. Wolfia publishes no equivalent.
Permissions
Role-based access control with granular permissions over who can view, edit and approve what.
For companies with several products, regulated business units, or a review chain running through legal and engineering, permission depth usually decides whether a tool gets rolled out past the first team.
Wolfia does not detail their permission model publicly. Ask them.
The rest of the stack
Skypher runs on top of the tools you already use. Intake and tracking in Salesforce. Review and approval in Slack and Teams. Continuous sync with OneDrive, SharePoint, Google Drive, Confluence, Notion and your website, so the knowledge base maintains itself. The trust center runs on the same knowledge base as the questionnaire engine, so an answer approved once stays consistent in both. TeamViewer's trust center runs on Skypher.
Adobe, Deel and McKinsey are customers, across 200+ enterprise customers at 96% accuracy. Adobe went from two weeks to two hours per questionnaire. You can book a demo and send us a real questionnaire to test.
Who should choose which
Choose Wolfia if contract and security addendum review is a real burden alongside questionnaires, if citation depth on every answer is your top criterion, and if you have the runway to train the system before automation rates climb.
Look at Skypher if you need answers in your team's voice without editing each one, if you need permission granularity across products or business units, or if you want a usable first draft from existing content rather than a training period.
Look at Conveyor if you want published pricing you can budget against.
Look at none of us if you want compliance monitoring and SOC 2 automation in the same subscription. That is a different category.
Wolfia vs Skypher compared
Skypher rows describe our product. Wolfia rows come from wolfia.com and UpGuard as of August 2026 and may have changed since.
FAQ
Is Wolfia a good security questionnaire tool?
Yes. Named customers include Amplitude, Miro, Instacart and CircleCI, with published results such as $1.5M+ in annual value at Amplitude and 90% automation with sub-two-day turnaround at Handshake. Its main differentiator is a source citation on every answer. The most cited limitation, per UpGuard, is the training period before automation rates climb.
How much does Wolfia cost?
Wolfia does not publish pricing. As of August 2026 their pricing page describes usage-based billing, "priced around the work, not the seat", with unlimited users and no per-seat or per-viewer fees, then directs prospects to contact sales. You will need a conversation to get a figure.
Does Wolfia have G2 reviews?
Not as of 2026. UpGuard's category comparison lists Wolfia as "Currently not rated" on G2, against Conveyor at 4.6 from 150 reviews and HyperComply at 4.3 from 12. If third-party reviews matter to your evaluation, factor that in.
What are the best Wolfia alternatives?
Skypher, Conveyor, SafeBase (now part of Drata), and the RFP-first platforms Loopio and Responsive. Skypher fits teams needing answer style control, granular role-based permissions and a short path to a usable first draft. Conveyor publishes pricing from $9,600 a year. SafeBase fits trust-center-first teams.
Wolfia vs Skypher: what is the actual difference?
Portal coverage and format handling are close to level. The real differences are that Wolfia has a Contract Review Agent for security addenda, which Skypher does not, and Skypher has answer style control and granular role-based permissions, which Wolfia does not publish. UpGuard also flags a training period before Wolfia's automation rates climb. Our roundup of questionnaire automation tools compares the wider field.
