Usually ISO 27001. For an Australian company selling in Australia, APAC or Europe, ISO 27001 is the credential buyers ask for. SOC 2 — an AICPA attestation report, not a certificate — is the US-market default, and some US enterprise buyers require it. The deciding input is who’s asking, so read your pipeline.
They’re the same class of thing — independent assurance that your security controls are real — delivered through two different mechanisms, aimed at two different markets.
| ISO 27001 | SOC 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | An international standard for an information security management system (ISMS) | An attestation framework published by the AICPA, the US accounting body |
| Who examines you | An accredited certification body | A licensed CPA firm |
| What you hand a buyer | A certificate | A Type I or Type II report |
| How the assessment runs | Stage 1 (documentation review) then Stage 2 (interviews and evidence) | Type I examines control design at a point in time; Type II examines operation over a review period |
| Ongoing cycle | Annual surveillance audits; full recertification every three years | Reports are refreshed as buyers require — most ask how recent yours is |
| Home market | International; the default ask in Australia, APAC and Europe | United States |
The vocabulary difference matters in sales conversations. ISO 27001 ends in a certificate you can list and a body that stands behind it. SOC 2 ends in a report — often long, often under NDA — that a buyer’s security team reads. Neither is stronger by definition; they’re different instruments, and buyers tend to ask for the one their own market taught them.
On cost, only one side has published Australian figures worth citing: at market rates, an ISO 27001 certification audit (Stage 1 plus Stage 2) runs A$8,000–20,000 ex GST, with the full first-year picture broken down in what ISO 27001 actually costs in Australia. SOC 2 examination fees are set by the CPA firm and move with the scope and the report period, so treat any single quoted number sceptically.
Read your pipeline, because the geography of your revenue answers this question more reliably than any framework comparison.
Selling in Australia and APAC: ISO 27001, almost always. Australian enterprise questionnaires ask for it by name, and it’s the recognised credential across the region. A SOC 2 report is rarely requested here and sometimes has to be explained before it can reassure.
Selling into Europe: ISO 27001 again. It’s the international standard, and European procurement is comfortable with it in a way it often isn’t with a US attestation format.
Selling to US enterprise: this is where SOC 2 appears. It’s the US-market default, and some US buyers name it as a hard procurement requirement. Others accept ISO 27001 — recognition has grown — but you can’t assume it. If your pipeline is dominated by US enterprise deals, SOC 2 first may genuinely be the right call, and you should hear that from an ISO-focused provider too.
Selling to all three: companies at that stage often end up holding both. The order should follow the nearest revenue, and the second credential is much cheaper in effort than the first, because the underlying work overlaps heavily: access control, change management, logging and monitoring, incident response, vendor management and the policy layer all feed both.
That overlap is the practical point for an Australian company deciding today. Building an ISO 27001 ISMS doesn’t strand you if a US deal later demands SOC 2 — the controls a CPA firm examines are largely controls your ISMS already operates and evidences. You’d engage a CPA firm and prepare a report; you wouldn’t rebuild your security program. Starting with the credential your current buyers ask for is not a bet against the other one.
Where we stand: Secure60 focuses on ISO 27001 and doesn’t provide SOC 2 services. When SOC 2 is the right answer for a client’s pipeline, we say so and they take that engagement to a CPA firm.
Choosing on merit instead of demand. Founders ask “which is better?” and comparison articles happily oblige with feature grids — but no buyer awards the deal to the objectively superior framework. They tick the box their procurement checklist names. The companies that lose months here are the ones that build the credential their actual pipeline never asked for, then start the other one under deal pressure.
A smaller error worth killing: “SOC 2 certified” appears on plenty of websites and means nothing. SOC 2 is an attestation report, not a certification. Buyers’ security teams know this, and the phrase reads as not having been through it.
We do ISO 27001 and we don’t do SOC 2 — plainly, so you can plan around it. We hold ISO 27001:2022 certification ourselves, and our governance capability builds and runs the ISMS: risk assessment, controls, evidence, and preparation for Stage 1 and Stage 2 with an accredited certification body, which is who performs the audit. If your pipeline says SOC 2 first, we’ll tell you that on the readiness call rather than argue you into ISO. If it says ISO — the usual answer for companies selling in Australia, APAC and Europe — we take you the whole way.
Is SOC 2 a certification?
No. SOC 2 is an attestation under the AICPA framework — a licensed CPA firm examines your controls and issues a Type I or Type II report. There’s no certificate and no register of ‘SOC 2 certified’ companies. ISO 27001 is the one that ends in a certificate, issued by an accredited certification body.
Will US buyers accept ISO 27001 instead of SOC 2?
Sometimes. Plenty of US enterprises recognise ISO 27001; some name SOC 2 specifically in procurement and won’t budge. You find out by asking the buyer, not by guessing — and if a live US deal names SOC 2, that answer outranks any general advice.
Does Secure60 do SOC 2?
No. We focus on ISO 27001, and we hold ISO 27001:2022 certification ourselves. If you need a SOC 2 report, that engagement belongs with a CPA firm — what we build for ISO overlaps heavily with what a SOC 2 examination looks at, so the work carries over.
Can we hold both ISO 27001 and SOC 2?
Yes, and companies selling into both markets often do. The sensible order is whichever your nearest revenue asks for; the overlap between the two means the second one costs less effort than the first.
If SOC 2 might come later, is starting with ISO 27001 a waste?
No. Much of what a SOC 2 examination covers — access control, change management, monitoring, incident response, policies — is work an ISO 27001 ISMS already does and evidences. ISO-first leaves you preparing a report, not starting over.
