SOC 1 vs SOC 2 vs SOC 3: Key Differences Explained

SOC 1 vs SOC 2 vs SOC 3

SOC 1, SOC 2, and SOC 3 are three different answers to three different questions. Organizations that confuse them pursue the wrong report for their needs. Buyers that misunderstand them request the wrong credential from their vendors. And the resulting mismatch — a SOC 1 report shared with a security procurement team, or a SOC 3 report presented as equivalent to a SOC 2 — creates friction, delays procurement, and signals a misunderstanding of the framework.

SOC 1 vs SOC 2 vs SOC 3 is one of the most searched questions in the service organization reporting space — and for good reason. The three reports share a name and a governing body, but they address different subject matter, serve different audiences, and produce different outputs. Understanding the differences is the prerequisite for making the right reporting decision.

This guide from CertPro CPA LLC explains exactly what each SOC report type covers, who it is for, what the output looks like, and how to determine which one — or which combination — is right for your organization. For the authoritative source on all three, see the AICPA’s SOC Suite of Services.

Tl; DR:

Concern: With the AICPA’s SOC Suite of Services offering three distinct report types, organizations and their buyers find it hard to understand what each report covers, who it is for, and how to determine which type — or combination — their specific situation requires.
Overview: SOC 1, SOC 2, and SOC 3 are three distinct service organization reporting frameworks published by the AICPA — SOC 1 addresses controls relevant to financial reporting, SOC 2 addresses security and operational controls under the Trust Services Criteria, and SOC 3 is a publicly shareable summary of a SOC 2 examination for general use.
Solution: Organizations should understand the purpose, audience, subject matter, and output of each SOC report type — so they can pursue the right report for their service model, satisfy the requirements of both financial statement auditors and enterprise procurement teams, and communicate their compliance status accurately to each audience.

SOC 1 vs SOC 2 vs SOC 3: Key Differences Explained

The three SOC report types published by the AICPA serve fundamentally different purposes. Understanding each one requires understanding the question it was designed to answer — because each report is the right answer to a specific question, and the wrong answer to the other two.

Quick Reference Comparison

Quick Reference Comparison:

SOC 1 SOC 2 SOC 3
Governing standard SSAE 18 (AT-C Sections 320/205) AT-C Section 205 + Trust Services Criteria AT-C Section 205 + Trust Services Criteria
Subject matter Controls relevant to user entities’ financial reporting Security, Availability, Confidentiality, Processing Integrity, Privacy Same as SOC 2
Primary audience User entities and their financial statement auditors Enterprise buyers, security teams, regulated-sector customers General public, marketing use
Report types Type 1, Type 2 Type 1, Type 2 No Type 1/2 distinction
Confidentiality Restricted distribution Restricted distribution Publicly shareable
Issued by Licensed CPA firm Licensed CPA firm Licensed CPA firm
Contains detailed test results Type 2 only Type 2 only No
Contains auditor opinion Yes Yes Yes (summary form)

SOC 1 — What It Is and When It Applies

SOC 1 is a service organization control report that addresses controls at a service organization that are relevant to a user entity’s internal control over financial reporting (ICFR). It is governed by AICPA AT-C Sections 320 and 205, and is specifically designed for use by user entities and their financial statement auditors.

The key question SOC 1 answers: Does this service organization have the controls necessary to ensure that the services it provides do not introduce material misstatement into the user entity’s financial statements?

SOC 1 — Types, Who Requests It

SOC 1 applies when a service organization provides services that could affect the completeness, accuracy, or validity of a user entity’s financial data. The most common scenarios: payroll processing, fund accounting, claims processing, transaction processing, and IT services for financial systems where errors in processing flow into the user entity’s financial statements.

SOC 1 Type 1 — evaluates whether controls are suitably designed to achieve the stated control objectives as of a specified date.

SOC 1 Type 2 — evaluates whether controls are suitably designed and operated effectively throughout a defined observation period — typically six to twelve months. Financial statement auditors require Type 2 for ongoing reliance.

Who requests SOC 1: SOC 1 requests almost always come from a user entity’s external auditor — the financial statement auditor who needs to understand and rely on the service organization’s controls as part of the user entity’s annual audit. Enterprise security and procurement teams do not request SOC 1 reports — security teams request SOC 2 reports. The two serve different functions and different audiences.

SOC 2 — What It Is and When It Applies

SOC 2 is a service organization attestation report that addresses controls over security, availability, confidentiality, processing integrity, and privacy — the five Trust Services Criteria published by the AICPA. It is governed by AICPA AT-C Section 205 and is specifically designed for enterprise buyers, security teams, and regulated-sector customers who need assurance about a vendor’s security posture.

The key question SOC 2 answers: Does this service organization have the controls necessary to protect the security, availability, confidentiality, processing integrity, and privacy of the data it processes on behalf of its customers?

SOC 2 — Types, Who Requests It

SOC 2 applies to any service organization that stores, processes, or transmits customer data on behalf of other businesses — and whose customers require independent assurance that the service organization’s security controls are adequate. In practice, this covers: SaaS companies selling to enterprise buyers, cloud infrastructure and hosting providers, fintech and payments companies, healthcare technology vendors, business process outsourcing providers, data analytics and AI platforms, and any vendor whose enterprise customers require security attestation.

For a full explanation of why SOC 2 is required and who needs it, see What is SOC 2? and Why is SOC 2 Important?

SOC 2 Type 1 — evaluates control design at a point in time. Used as an interim credential while the observation period for Type 2 runs.

SOC 2 Type 2 — evaluates control design and operational effectiveness across an observation period. Enterprise buyers require Type 2 for ongoing vendor relationships. For the full breakdown, see SOC 2 Type 2.

Who requests SOC 2: SOC 2 requests come from enterprise procurement teams, vendor security review processes, regulated-sector onboarding requirements, and investor due diligence processes. The audience is operational and commercial — not financial audit.

SOC 3 — Public-Facing Summary Report

SOC 3 is a general-use report that contains a summary of a CPA firm’s opinion on whether a service organization’s controls met the applicable Trust Services Criteria — designed for public distribution. It is based on the same examination as a SOC 2 report but contains none of the detailed test results, system description, or exception documentation found in the full report.

The key question SOC 3 answers: Can this service organization publicly demonstrate that it has been examined against the Trust Services Criteria and received a clean opinion?

What SOC 3 contains: The CPA firm’s opinion — a brief summary of the auditor’s conclusion; management’s assertion — a statement from management about the control environment; and the Trust Services Criteria seal — a visual marker indicating which criteria were examined. No system description. No test results. No exception detail.

SOC 3 limitations: SOC 3 does not satisfy enterprise buyer requirements. Enterprise procurement teams and regulated-sector customers require the full SOC 2 report — with the system description, test results, and exception detail that allows them to assess the service organization’s controls properly.

SOC 3 is useful for: Website and marketing use; responding to general vendor qualification inquiries that do not require a full report; and providing general market signal without disclosing the confidential details of the full SOC 2 report.

SOC 3 is not useful for: Enterprise procurement qualification processes, financial statement audit reliance, regulated-sector vendor onboarding, or any context where the buyer needs to review test results or exceptions.

Who issues SOC 3: SOC 3 is issued by the same licensed CPA firm that conducted the underlying SOC 2 examination. CertPro CPA LLC can issue a SOC 3 report alongside — but not instead of — the SOC 2 report for clients who want a publicly shareable credential in addition to the confidential full report.

Can an Organization Need Both SOC 1 and SOC 2?

Yes — and this is more common than organizations expect.

A payroll processing platform that also stores sensitive HR data may need both: a SOC 1 report — because its payroll calculations affect its customers’ financial statements — and a SOC 2 report — because its enterprise customers’ security teams require assurance about the security of the HR data it holds.

Similarly, a financial technology company processing transactions (SOC 1 territory) that also provides a cloud platform handling sensitive client data (SOC 2 territory) may need both.

When both are needed, CertPro CPA LLC coordinates the engagements to minimize duplication — leveraging overlapping control evidence where applicable and structuring the observation periods to align wherever possible.

Which SOC Report Does Your Organization Need?

Your customers’ financial statement auditors are requesting it — SOC 1. The request is coming from the financial audit process, and the report needs to address controls relevant to financial reporting.

Your enterprise procurement or security teams are requesting it — SOC 2. The request is coming from vendor qualification, and the report needs to address security and operational controls under the Trust Services Criteria.

You want a publicly shareable credential — SOC 3. Issue alongside your SOC 2 report for marketing and general use.

Both financial auditors and security teams are requesting reports — both SOC 1 and SOC 2, coordinated to minimize duplication.

You are a SaaS company, cloud provider, or technology service organization with no direct impact on financial reporting — SOC 2 only.

You are a payroll processor, fund administrator, or transaction processor — SOC 1 and possibly SOC 2 depending on whether your security posture is also under scrutiny.

SOC 1 vs SOC 2 vs SOC 3 — Detailed Comparison

Subject Matter

SOC 1 addresses controls relevant to ICFR — the specific controls that affect the completeness, accuracy, validity, and authorization of the user entity’s financial data.

SOC 2 addresses controls relevant to the Trust Services Criteria — Security, Availability, Confidentiality, Processing Integrity, and Privacy.

SOC 3 addresses the same subject matter as SOC 2 — but presents only the opinion, not the underlying detail.

Audience

SOC 1 — user entities and their financial statement auditors, used in the financial statement audit process.

SOC 2 — enterprise buyers, security teams, regulated-sector customers, and sophisticated operational stakeholders, used in vendor qualification and compliance contexts.

SOC 3 — the general public, published on websites and shared in marketing materials.

Confidentiality

SOC 1 and SOC 2 — restricted distribution, shared under NDA with customers, prospects, and regulators who have a legitimate need.

SOC 3 — public, no restriction on distribution.

Report Contents

SOC 1 Type 2 — auditor’s opinion, management’s assertion, system description, description of control objectives, and description of tests and results.

SOC 2 Type 2 — auditor’s opinion, management’s assertion, system description, description of controls by Trust Services Criteria, and description of tests and results including exceptions. See SOC 2 Report for the full section breakdown.

SOC 3 — auditor’s opinion, management’s assertion, Trust Services seal. No test results, no exceptions, no system description.

Obtain Your SOC Report with CertPro CPA LLC

CertPro CPA LLC is a licensed CPA firm that issues SOC 1 and SOC 2 attestation reports under AICPA professional standards. We advise clients on the right report type for their service model and customer requirements, coordinate multi-report engagements for organizations that need both SOC 1 and SOC 2, and issue SOC 3 reports alongside SOC 2 for clients who want a publicly shareable credential.

Explore the full SOC 2 hub for detailed guidance on every aspect of the SOC 2 process.

Ready to begin? Contact CertPro CPA LLC to determine which SOC report is right for your organization.

FAQ

Is SOC 2 better than SOC 1?

They are not comparable on a better/worse scale — they address different subject matter for different audiences. SOC 1 is the right report when financial statement auditors require it. SOC 2 is the right report when enterprise security teams require it. The “better” report is the one that matches the requirement.

Can a SOC 3 report substitute for a SOC 2 report?

No. Enterprise buyers require the full SOC 2 report — with system description, test results, and exception detail. A SOC 3 report contains none of that detail and cannot substitute for SOC 2 in any enterprise qualification context.

Does SOC 2 replace SOC 1?

No. SOC 2 and SOC 1 coexist and address different requirements. Organizations that need SOC 1 continue to need it regardless of whether they also hold a SOC 2 report.

What is SSAE 18?

SSAE 18 is the AICPA standard that governs SOC 1 engagements — Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements No. 18. It replaced SSAE 16 in 2017. SOC 2 engagements are governed by AT-C Section 205.

Is SOC 3 free to publish?

SOC 3 reports can be published publicly — there are no restrictions on distribution. However, they must be issued by the same licensed CPA firm that conducted the underlying SOC 2 examination. Self-issued or vendor-generated “SOC 3” materials are not valid.

What happened to SAS 70?

SAS 70 was the predecessor to SOC 1, retired in 2011 when SSAE 16 (now SSAE 18) replaced it. References to “SAS 70 certified” are outdated — the current equivalent is a SOC 1 Type 2 report.

Schedule A Meeting