OneTrust Sale Rumours: Have Smart Teams Already Planning Their Switch

For the past decade, privacy and compliance teams have relied on OneTrust as the “safe” enterprise default. It wasn’t perfect - complex, heavy, often slow - but it was predictable. Trusted. Stable.

That stability is now in question.

Rumors of a OneTrust sale to private equity aren’t just industry noise—they are a turning point. When the largest player in privacy operations enters a consolidation cycle, it signals something bigger: the end of the one-size-fits-all privacy suite era, and the beginning of a more modular, automation-first future.

Across the industry, privacy, security, and engineering leaders are asking the same questions:

• “What does this mean for our long-term roadmap?”

• “Will pricing spike or support decline?”

• “Is now the right time to modernize our compliance stack?”

This guide was written to answer those questions clearly without the hype, without the fear, and without positioning any vendor as the “only option.”

 It’s a practical, objective look at how to navigate the post-OneTrust landscape

I. Introduction: The OneTrust Sale and the Call for GRC Stability

Acknowledging the News: A Catalyst for Market Re-evaluation

Recent reports suggest that OneTrust is exploring a potential private-equity acquisition. This is not unusual in a maturing market, but it is a clear signal to customers: when ownership changes, roadmap stability and cost predictability may not follow.

This guide isn’t a criticism of OneTrust-it’s a recognition that major platform transitions require teams to re-evaluate long-term viability, especially in compliance and privacy operations where continuity is essential.

The Imperative for Re-evaluation

The privacy-tech ecosystem has shifted from high-growth VC funding to consolidation. TrustArc’s acquisition by BigID, restructuring at Securiti, and OneTrust’s rumored sale are signs that the market is entering a more stable but less innovative phase.

Teams are using this moment to ask:

• Are we overpaying for a monolithic suite we only use partially?

• Should we move to more automated, modern tools?

• Is now the right time to untangle privacy ops from audit and engineering compliance?

This guide outlines the landscape and provides a structured way to evaluate alternatives.

II. The Private Equity Effect: Risks and Opportunities for Customers

The Inherent Risks of Consolidation

1. Efficiency Over Innovation PE ownership often slows roadmap velocity as the focus shifts from innovation to profitability.

2. Product Rationalization Low-usage or low-margin modules may be merged or discontinued.

3. Pricing & Support Volatility Historically, major transitions are followed by price increases, support restructuring, and SKU bundling.

The Opportunity: Finding the Right-Fit Solution

Consolidation forces teams to re-evaluate whether their current stack solves the right problems. Many SaaS and fintech organizations realize that their real blockers are:

• Proving security posture

• Achieving ISO 27001 / SOC 2

• Demonstrating software supply-chain safety

• Reducing manual workload and evidence chaos

This creates an opportunity to move from monolithic privacy suites to modular, automation-first platforms.

III. The Modern Privacy & GRC Landscape: A Vendor Mapping Resource

Organizations turn to OneTrust for three primary clusters of capabilities:

1. Privacy Operations (RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, consent, incident logs)

2. Governance & GRC (certification workflows, risk registers, policies, vendor risk)

3. Security & Trust (questionnaires, some assessment workflows)

Below is a simplified, business-impact-focused view of which vendor category can replace which part of OneTrust.

Category 1: The Consolidated Giants

(TrustArc, Securiti)**

How They Replace OneTrust

• Full privacy operations suite (RoPA, DPIA, DSAR, cookies, consent)

• Vendor risk & privacy program management

Strengths	Limitations
Closest functional match to OneTrust Low switching complexity for privacy teams	Heavy, slow-moving architectures Limited engineering automation

Partner Tools to Fill Gaps

• Consent/Cookies: Cookiebot, Usercentrics, OsanoDSAR: Transcend, Kertos

  
  

Category 2: Certification & Traditional GRC

(Vanta, Drata, Secureframe, SureCloud, ISMS.online)**

How They Replace OneTrust

• ISO 27001 & SOC 2 readiness

• Risk registers, controls, audit workflows

Strengths	Limitations
Fastest path to certification Lower operational overhead	No privacy ops (no RoPA/DPIA/DSAR) Shallow technical evidence automation

Partner Tools to Fill Gaps

• Privacy Ops: TrustArc, Transcend

• Consent: Cookiebot

  
  

Category 3: Hyper-Specialized Automation

(Snyk, Holistic AI, Kertos, Transcend)**

How They Replace OneTrust

• Replace specific OneTrust modules (DSAR, vulnerability mgmt, AI governance)

Strengths	Limitations
Best-in-class depth in a single workflow High automation for that specific domain	Not full-suite replacements Requires stitching multiple tools

Partner Tools

Typically paired with Category 2 or Category 4 platforms.

Category 4: The Unified, AI-Native Platforms

(Zerberus, JupiterOne*, Wiz*, Anecdotes.ai*)**

(*) partial fit — do not provide unified compliance

How Zerberus Replaces OneTrust

• Automates the technical compliance layer that OneTrust does manually

• Real-time evidence, control mapping, SBOMs, predictive supply-chain risk

Strengths	Limitations
High automation → drastically reduced audit workload Designed for fast-growing SaaS and complex engineering environments	Zerberus intentionally does not offer: Cookie banners Consent management DSAR workflows

These are integrated via Cookiebot, Kertos, Transcend, TrustArc.

IV. A Framework for Vendor Assessment and Transition

Phase 1: Needs Assessment

• Identify which OneTrust modules your team actually uses

• Prioritize privacy ops vs. GRC vs. engineering compliance

Phase 2: Vendor Vetting

• Demand demos showing automation, not workflows

• Require transparent pricing

  
  

Phase 3: Transition Planning

• Export OneTrust data

• Run your new platform in parallel for 30–60 days

• Train privacy, security & engineering teams

V. Conclusion: Making an Informed Choice

The OneTrust sale isn’t the real risk - dependency on any single, monolithic platform is. Long-term stability comes from a modular, automation-first architecture that lets you replace or upgrade components without disrupting your privacy or compliance program.

Start small: modernize one workflow, one geography, or one product line. Validate automation outputs with your auditors, then expand. This approach turns migration into a controlled rollout, not a high-risk overhaul.

If you want help mapping your current OneTrust usage and identifying modern replacements, request our Post-OneTrust Migration Blueprint - a 30-minute, vendor-agnostic assessment designed to create a roadmap for stability, regardless of what happens next.

If you’d like a neutral, vendor-agnostic assessment of your current OneTrust usage - and a mapping of which pieces can be modernized or automated without disruption - request our Post-OneTrust Migration Blueprint.

It’s a 30-minute workshop that gives you:

• A visual map of your current workflows

• A breakdown of what to keep, replace, or modernize

• A tailored plan showing which tools fit each part of your stack

• A risk profile for waiting vs. transitioning now

  
  

Request the Post-OneTrust Migration Blueprint

Click Me

Let’s help you design a compliance architecture built for stability, no matter what happens with OneTrust.