How AI Is Repricing Every Software Company

We have talked to our customers a lot

about token based pricing and I think

what we've generally heard people are

real smart but actually and so if you

try to charge them based on tokens they

are very quick to say oh you've just

marked up a claude token forex are you

forex as good as claude I don't know let

me go try it out you actually put

yourselves in a competitive position

against the models and so what we've

seen on token pricing is like if If

you're trying to mark up at all, users

are very smart and you will lose on that

comparison.

>> So, Christina, I've been so excited to

do this with you. I think it's been five

years since we last did it. So, a lot a

lot has happened a lifetime ago.

>> Uh you've been very successful in the

intervening 5 years. So, so I'm excited

to catch up. Can you give us like the

one minute history of Vanta? I know

we've done this before, but just to

level set for people when you started

it, why, what it did then, how it's

evolved, what it does now. Just like a

quick quick overview.

>> Started Vanta about 8 years ago, which

was about 8,000. Yeah, exactly. You're

like in 17 centuries ago with the

premise of can we help companies build

and earn trust? and build trust is like

start security programs and compliance

programs or mature them and then go go

get credit for their customers through

audits like a sock 2 or ISO 270 and

HIPPA etc questionnaires trust centers

but basically this idea of can we build

a security company by helping companies

implement security because it's what

their customer is asking for and so

we're initially known for sock 2 we had

a billboard we do have a billboard on

the 101 that We're mostly known for

making billboards, I joke, but it

started like very compliance, very audit

centric. The idea was always, hey,

that's just like one way to get a

company started on this. And so since

then, we've gone into different areas of

security. We've gone into different ways

of like earning trust with your

customers. And so today we're about

16,000 customers global with about five

products.

>> How did you win? Like this this was a

new category when you started and then I

remember I had to go through it. my old

business get sock 2 compliant and

certified in order to win certain

accounts or whatever and so it became an

important thing kind of in the software

era there were many companies I I could

probably name a handful that were trying

to do what you're trying to do

>> you've emerged as sort of the only major

winner what would you attribute it to

over the last since we last talked like

how did you win

>> execution I think you have to both like

software the blessing and the curse and

this is you know more true now even than

it was 5 years ago like you're really

only as good as the last thing you

shipped

And so you can be first and you can

start it and doesn't really matter. I

mean that's more true now because it's

like someone can vibe code your thing in

a weekend. And so you've just got to

like constantly be shipping new

products, new features that make the

experience better for customers and like

running on that differentiation. And so

there's some feature level. I think the

other thing we really invested in when

it got competitive that was very good

was integrations pulling in data from

other tools. And so now you can connect

Vanta to one of 400 tools. We c we pull

a ton of data out of those tools and

that's what powers the automation, the

agent, the AI, all of that. We call it

our trust graph. It's really just like a

security data lake and that is bigger

broader than any other provider

including some of the security providers

because we touch areas they don't and I

think that in retrospect that data

foundation has let us build new things

faster software and agent. It was that

piece and then I think on the go to

market side it was like just push good

billboards

>> like shockingly good compliance that

doesn't suck too much. Um which got

really popular on our/ac accounting

which none of us knew was a bucket list

item in our lives but um when r/ac

accounting likes your things you're like

okay something something worked and then

the lived experience is just like you

can feel like you are going as fast as

you can and you should in fact lean in

further and like push harder.

>> What was the scariest moment? I mean,

you know, the last 12 months, South

Apocalypse, you're like, "Okay, great.

You know, great job building a system of

record. You're now screwed.

>> You're now worthless."

>> Yeah, exactly. You're worth like good

job playing the game. Here's some steak

knives. Parts of that are true and parts

of it are not true. But again, in the

vein of like, you're only as good as the

last thing you shipped. You're like,

great. So, you know, what are you what

is the agent? You have all this data in

a system of record. Fine. What what the

heck are you doing with it?

>> Say more about what that's felt like.

Roughly Vanta is a business that is

growing very fast by historical

standards with very high margins. Yes.

>> Which four years ago is considered like

the best business model ever.

>> Y

>> um nothing changed about that. I think

you're probably growing faster and the

margins are margins still really high. Y

>> and yet the market has decided that the

multiple for a business like yours is a

third of what it used to be or quarter

of what it used to be.

>> So what is that? Yeah. What what has it

been like to live through that as one of

those entrepreneurs?

>> I think cognitive dissonance like you've

got to hold two things in your head,

right? One is the like look I think at

the fullness of time a 80% growth

business with 80% margins will like

>> be good

>> be well not yeah be good and actually be

better than like over the same time

period run it out long enough a you know

160% growth business with 30% margins.

You're like one of these will like

return more cash right in the fullness

of time. But today the latter is valued

at you know 3x 4x the multiple of the

former 10x the multiple of the former

right and so there's a part where you're

like hey guys everyone's being

irrational here and then there's a and

like this is a good business and you

have to keep do you know keep doing

things that make business sense and

doing the things that customers want

which may or may not be

you know token pricing models that put

you more in the latter category than the

former profile.

And then there's like a very clear like

game on the field piece where you're

like a D like well if you need to be

financed again you're looking at

investors today many of whom are kind of

AI maximalists and are like talk to

firms that are like yeah we'll invest in

the labs and we'll basically invest in

tractors in Iowa and like nothing in

between you know robo like robo tractors

in Iowa at a lab and like everything

else and you're like huh interesting

point of view and then from a like

talent perspective right like people you

know you hire ambitious ious people who

want to do things and if it feels like

they're not in the right boat, they're

going to change boats, right? Like the

talent war part is very real, too.

>> And so, you just kind of got to live

with like, okay, in the fullness of

time, I think this will all kind of sort

itself out. And you have to live for the

fullness of time.

>> So, there's this there's this kind of

funny fear that now like bending spoons

is like the grim the grim reaper in the

hallway, you know, meme or whatever. Uh,

no one wants to be a Ben spoon. Love

bending spoons, by the way. I think it's

an interesting question of how do you

like the siren song right now is like

sell tokens yep

>> via agents for security and compliance

I'm sure or something like this

>> lots of thoughts on this

>> I'm just so interested by by companies

like yours that were sort of winners of

this last era that now have to make a

sort of set of decisions right

>> look at the tenure rate like the cost of

capital is going up because you can put

lots of money at really high return in

AI stuff for the time being

>> and so someone looking at your business

is like well I want you know higher

returns or the same returns and I get

that through agents or something. Talk

me through what it's been like to make

the decisions. What are you thinking

today? Do you think of yourself as an AI

business? What's that look like?

>> So, we do and not just like oh and I

like also think of myself as like the

best human in the world like not there's

probably some of that but like when we

go benchmark where we are from a agent

in our product perspective against

you know quote unquote AI applications

we have yet to find someone who is

further along. Now you could be like

we're doing a bad job looking is like

you know the obvious critique there but

just we are like constantly going to the

set of names you imagine when you think

AI applications and generally finding

they're not yet where we are where an

agent is doing most of the work the

agent the other one of the things it's

chat based but there's like longrunning

agents our agent is like autogenerating

UI on the fly because sometimes you want

chat right and sometimes you want UI but

we just have an agent that

building UI user can do something comes

back in the flow keeps it going like

very much optimized around the like keep

the user going in the flow loops

>> just so I make sure I understand meaning

you are like a watchdog that's always on

watching the security

>> you're definitely that but in some ways

you're you could do that in the past

with just like monitoring and alerting

this is more like the Vanta product

experience is now oriented around an

agent that is bringing you as a user

things and often saying, "Hey, I went

and did this for you. Are you good with

it? Then I will go do it." Okay, great.

The next thing I think I should go do.

>> What's an example? Just like ground that

an example.

>> Someone just left your company and you

didn't take, you didn't get them out all

of their accounts. I just like wrote a

custom agent for you that will go do

that. Do you want me to go turn this on?

Great. Do you also want me to go, you

know, remove accounts, access from these

three people? Great. You want that

running always?

>> So, it's not just like, here's a red

alert that someone didn't meet the

monitoring step. It's like too many.

Would you like me to go do this? And

then kind of it's it's we're taking a

lot from the AI labs in their UI, but

it's like you want me to do this once,

do you want me to do this always? Great.

>> And so the idea is like the agent will

just be doing more of this work with the

user's permission, but it's like if they

tell us to go do it, we're just going to

go. Anyway, in the course of that, we

end up using a lot of tokens. We have

talked to our customers a lot about

token based pricing. And I think what

we've generally heard is like people are

real smart but actually and so if you

try to charge them based on tokens they

are very quick to say oh you've just

marked up a claude token forex

are you forex as good as claude I don't

know let me go try it out and so and

then you're like you actually put

yourselves in a competitive position

against the models I think probably no

application really wants to do like we

can talk about harnesses but like you

don't want to get fair. And so what

we've seen on token pricing is like if

you're trying to mark up at all, users

are very smart and you will lose on that

comparison.

>> You can like not mark up and this gets

to the margin question, right? Um

but anyone who is marking up cloud

tokens forex and trying to like pass

that off to their users, I think it's

like that is not a model.

>> We're eating the token cost right now.

>> You're just taking lower margin. we're

taking lower margin and honestly just

like really concentrate on usage because

like that experience that I just talked

through where the agent is going off and

doing things we just like fundamentally

believe that is a much better user

experience and we've got call it

25% of our like all of our customers in

that sort of flow right now and we're

like look if we can get that to 75% one

I think we like much better retention

like net retention there you know it's

just like a much customer experience and

then if we need to go sort out pricing

later, we we should go sort out pricing

later. But like this is a usage phase

and like a deployment phase of this

technology and just go nail that and you

can figure out commercialization after.

>> Ramp is the only platform built to make

your finance team leaner, faster, and

better, saving businesses 5% annually on

average, so you can stay focused on

growth. Ramp just opened for business in

the United Kingdom. So, if you're

running a business in the UK, you can

now use RAMP's AI powered finance

platform to manage cards, expenses,

bills, approvals, and accounting all in

one place. I run my business on RAMP,

and so should you. Learn more at

ramp.com/invest.

OpenAI, Cursor, Anthropic, Perplexity,

and Verscell all have something in

common. They all use WorkOS. And here's

why. To achieve enterprise adoption at

scale, you have to deliver on core

capabilities like SSO, skim, arbback,

and audit logs. That's where work OS

comes in. Instead of spending months

building these missionritical

capabilities yourself, you can just use

work OS APIs to gain all of them on day

zero. That's why so many of the top AI

teams you hear about already run on work

OS. Work OS is the fastest way to become

enterprise ready and stay focused on

what matters most, your product. Visit

works.com to get started. ROGO is the AI

platform purpose-built for financial

institutions serving tens of thousands

of bankers and investors at hundreds of

leading firms worldwide. Rogo's AI

agents autonomously execute large chunk

of your firm's workflows. They can

screen deals, draft sims, run buyer

outreach, and do diligence on data

rooms, all with full security and

compliance handled. Every action feeds

Rogo Intelligence, the firm's context

layer, turning years of deal experience,

into a secure, governed institutional

memory that makes each new transaction

stronger than the last. To learn more,

visit rogo.com/invest.

I'm also so curious. You said marking up

a cla token, but what about marking up

like a Kimmy token or like something

that's much cheaper? like how what

what's it been like deciding what to

use, what's good enough versus cost if

you're not passing through the

>> Yeah, this was something we started

concentrating on at the beginning of the

year. It was basically like evals. Yeah.

>> For all the and like task specific or

agent specific evals from a product

perspective. We call it all the Vanta

agent and it's one thing of course

behind the scene it's like hundreds of

agents that all have specific tasks and

use tools and have computers and you

know that whole setup that I think

everyone's converging on. But in the

beginning of the year really invested in

using our our subject matter experts the

folks who like ran security and

compliance programs at other companies

to write the eval frameworks and then

eval their evals and using tooling for

that anyway. And so when we think about

model swapping it is right again right

now it's like mostly quality it's not

cost I also think some of it this is

because we don't use as many tokens as

coding I think we're also all starting

to like coding is and coding agents lots

of token use maybe legal and like

document drafting next and then when you

get to more of the decision action world

which is where we are get relative to

coding we just don't use that many

tokens

>> anyway and so that kind of lets like

optimize for quality versus being as

concerned about cost as some of the

other companies.

>> When you talk to other founders both of

your era and of this new era, what are

they doing here? Are they also eating

the cost and just charging a software

fee? What do you think the the end

state's going to be?

>> I think everyone wants to get to outcome

pricing and if you actually go talk to a

pricing person, they will tell you it's

actually output pricing because it's not

but whatever. Like everyone wants to get

to that. And like in another life I was

a microeconomics professor like I love

this conceptually like I love the like

we will we get paid for outcomes and the

alignment of incentives love it. The

hard part is just like what are the

outcomes and I think you know support

ticket closed makes a lot of sense

actually to that maybe differentiate

outcome and output as I understand it in

support the ticket closed is an output

the outcome is actually like my Sonos

now works right but even like the ticket

closed that is relatively

unobjectionable I think a lot of

companies included are trying to figure

out what's that like neat unit of work

that we can all agree on and you can say

it's oh it's a document drafted it's an

alert closed it's an account offboarded

and you can kind of do that but then

there's just so much cognitive overhead

because you're like I just named three

things I could name another 47 and then

our user has to be like oh well if I do

this with the agent I paid this but if I

do it you know and you're just like no

one no one wants that I think everyone I

talk to wants to get to outcome output

pricing but it's really not clear how

you get there I think token charging

tokens themselves

really puts you up against cloud. So

then people try to obscure that by

charging credits and having some like

credit token exchange rate thing which I

think again users are smart and they're

like I see what you're doing and I see

you've obscured it. Fine. Are you

similarly far along in if you compared

yourself to the just as you did just now

to companies and how you're building

product and the business using these

tools? Like how would you grade yourself

on like what are you doing that's

interesting there?

>> I think okay so we in the vein of like

8-year-old company and 8-year-old code

base it is so much easier to throw the

coding agents at a small codebase than a

large one and that's like a token input

thing and they're getting better and

better. But one thing we've spent a lot

of time also investing in in the last

year and I know notion has spent a bunch

bunch of time in and they were like nine

months ahead of us on is modularizing

parts of the codebase so that the agent

can just understand smaller parts of it

and understand it fully and then be

really effective. Whereas if you chuck

it at again eight your codebase site

unseen it just like doesn't have the

context window to understand everything

and will do silly things and so you then

you need a high context engineer to

babysit it which is helpful but like

sort of invalidates some of the point.

Um companies have always had this

problem. They've just talked about it as

like oh when we onboard a new engineer

it takes them a while to figure out the

code base. It's just agents have made it

like well great now we want to onboard

9,000 new engineers tomorrow. Um, and so

it's just like heightened that problem.

So I I give ourselves a lower grade on

that just cuz we've had we are like in

the process of using agents and people

to make the codebase easier to

understand too.

>> Like you had to grade yourself one

through 10 about like wow this changes

everything. Building this company from

this point forward is going to be

totally different. Is a 10.

>> Oh yeah. Like nine. Yeah.

>> You are like a nine.

>> Eight nine. I mean I think the like

principles are still the same. Like

everything is hard. People matter. you

know like all the tropes are still the

tropes but the way you do stuff it

should be quite different. Do you feel

like there's a separation happening?

Again, if I took your cohort of the

successful, you know, eight year ago era

companies,

>> like do you feel there there's a

bifurcation where some have gotten the

memo and are are doing really well and

some are just like going to bending

spoons

>> kind of. Yeah. Yeah. I think there are

just structural parts of some markets

and I think Bending Spoon's very good at

you know identifying these where

you can put any entrepreneur in the

world on in that structure. This is kind

of like the like does market or founder

win Andre Horowitz thing and you're like

market wins. I think that is still true

and I think this AI technology shift has

made what some markets that used to look

really good look really bad and the best

person in the world can run in that will

still run into a brick wall. And I think

there is a like founder motivation piece

where it's like you got to be in it and

like push in this era and if you don't

want to do that totally fine but like

the rest of the company will not you

know self-organized to do so.

>> So given that you've been at the edge

like what's the you know adopting AI 101

if you're back to being a professor what

have been the most important things that

have been hard to do but have proven

fruitful? just getting people to use it

which I think there's like a and then

okay so which sounds obvious but it's

like definitely use it yourself build

for your company personally does not

matter just like understand where the

models are where they're good where

they're bad what harness means like you

just like and like kind of do that at

least every two weeks because it just

changes so quickly and I do think you

have to have a like visceral

understanding of what works and what

doesn't so that when somebody comes and

they say we're going um

fire all of our SDRs because I built one

agent and you can kind of be like did

you know you know like where where is

that true and where that false anyway so

there's like a be in the mock and then I

think it's like yeah you want to get as

many other people in that as possible

broadly generalized it's very black and

white but it's like yeah and some people

just go do that and some people don't if

you'd asked me a year ago you'd been

like oh well there's like some you know

intrinsic motivation and you know kind

of the people who aren't separate

problems go deal with them.

I think I'm slightly more empathetic now

in that we have seen I can give a

specific example but like very strong

people kind of not go dive in and you

have to like nudge them more but like

try to figure out what's blocking them

and something can be blocking them and

you can get people into the like into

the muck even if they don't dive in

initially. So if you're a small company

starting out on Manta, great. We've got

this like set of controls for you. You

just you adopt them. You maybe mess with

them on the edges, but you're like off

to the races. If you're a larger

company, you clearly run a security and

compliance program. And you come to

Vanta because you want that visualized.

You want the automation and you want the

monitoring. You want the real-time

dashboards. You don't want the like jur

thing. Fine. Well, the hard part hard

part is you've got to get all that

existing stuff, the controls, the risks,

the data, the policies, the procedure,

all that stuff in Vanta. Classically,

the way you would do that SAS company is

you're like, "Oh, we're going to make an

onboarding wizard. It has four steps and

a progress bar and we will like give you

confetti, you know, like you're going to

do that whole thing." We were setting

out to build better better onboarding

this year. And the first couple product

reviews, the team kept bringing

onboarding wizards. Kept being like,

"Stop with the onboarding." Like, "No,

you know, go use an LLM. Stop." But they

kept bringing onboarding wizards. And

this was like a motivated team, talented

people. They cared and kept bringing

onboarding wizards. And we finally got

them. Anyway, the experience now they

shipped and is working is it's basically

clawed. It's like big canvas. Drag all

your messy files in, drag in all your

screenshots. we will like make sense of

it, ask you questions and then you are

set up and off to the races and it works

really well. So like why were these

smart motivated people bringing on

boarding wizards? So you go out like

finally and the thing was they were like

well we don't know if we can get the

like drag your files thing to work it

might not work and we know the

onboarding wizard will work because

we've built those before and like we

basically don't think we're allowed to

fail on this project. and you come and

you're like, "Oh, that's the thing.

Great. Well, like

we're just gonna like bet that the on

the LLM flow is going to work and we

will make it work and we will hill climb

all we need to, but like burn the boat

and just make this thing work." And then

they were like, "Oh, okay, great." You

know, do you want a next product review

tomorrow? But it was this like funny

thing where you're like, "I would not

have guessed that that was their

blocker." and you like solve that and

they were like going

>> you mentioned the talent war thing

before there's this big trend you know

the low low margin high growth thing

where like from an investor's

perspective the the funny example you

gave of a lab or a tractor like everyone

wants something that can be that thing

and so like tell me about how you're

going to be a hundred billion dollar

business or a trillion dollar business

somehow now every business needs to be

that big

>> um what's that like to face down where

you may not be building a business that

should be a hundred billion dollar

business there's like a hundred of those

in the world like there's not that many.

>> Yeah. And it's not to say Vanta won't

be, but I do think the it's funny. It's

like a uh I think for me it's like oh

should I adjust the pitch and be like

well inevitably you know the baseline

here is Fanta's 50 billion. The real

question you should be considering, you

know, is like, if you join, can you take

us on a journey to like 250 billion? And

you're like, should I just start saying

that? You know, like again, like pro

like the answer is like probably not,

but the answer is not definitely not.

Totally. Cuz you're like, well, that is

like that is the pitch that people who

work at Vanta are getting from other

companies, you know, and then and then

you're just kind of like, okay, well, do

you and I try not to like counter by,

you know, being like, well, they suck.

But it's just this like the market now

is saying that so much and so if you

don't you do seem unambitious.

>> So what do you do?

>> There's like a Vanta principle value but

principle of like do what it says on the

tin which is kind of like do what you

say you're going to do. And look you can

put ambitious things on a tin. It's not

that but like don't overpromise and

underdel.

And so kind of what we do is like give

some of that like here's what we do as a

company, good, bad, and different, but

just like here's the context. Now like

let me talk to you about the business

metrics and we'll generally just show as

candidate to like show everybody

everything. It's fine. They're good.

Like we don't really want them to leak,

but if they leak, it's not the worst.

And then walk them through that and what

we're doing and how that grows over time

and like try to root it in all of the

facts and all of the data. And so in

some ways it's like

counter the vibes with like data and

trustworthy vibes versus yolo vibes I

guess.

>> And and so what is it like in those

talent wars? Like if if the most

talented people are being told you know

this thing's going to go to a trillion

by basically every other company that's

trying to hire them. Well, the better

one is uh well, we're six billion today,

but like Sequoia is going to do a $10

billion check in a month and then like

somebody's going to write it up to 25

next year, but we can get you in at six

today.

>> Yeah,

>> that's a good one.

>> Yeah,

>> that one's tough.

>> So, you're faced with that like what do

you do? Do maybe like not want those

people like maybe it's a filter that

>> sometimes

I like no magic playbook here. I think

if you go to the person and be like what

are you optimizing for, right? And like

why are you kind of like why did you

entertain this but not in a pokey way

just in a like what's annoying you at

Vanta right and actually one of these in

specific very strong leader still at

Vanta but like it was basically this

person felt like they couldn't make

decisions that would put Vanta on a

similar trajectory and that would be

their preference but they're like oh but

this new place is promising me like full

decision-making authority on this

trajectory and you're like totally fair

feedback. back. What do you need to feel

like you can make these decisions? Like

just go make these decisions. Go. Like

there's a money part and a FOMO part for

sure. We've definitely gone up on comp.

And you know, comp bands are like people

are going to hate that I but like comp

bands are kind of a joke now. You're

like the comp band is whatever data you

have is wrong. It is like what is being

offered to these people in

>> how much more do you pay the top person

at Vanta than you did like as a multiple

versus like

>> oh I think we should have way more comp

dispersion than we do.

>> So how but but even so that's

interesting but if I go 5 years back and

that person made X dollars what multiple

of X does the person make now?

>> Total comp

>> it's probably like a factor of 10.

>> Wow.

>> And it should I think it actually should

be higher. My general comp philosophy is

like you never pay the top people

>> enough

>> enough and you should keep you should

always try to be like very clear you

should always try and you will never hit

it and there's a bunch of people you pay

much more than their contribution

>> say say a bit more about what those top

people are doing that's so valuable

typically

>> just like high agency get done like

it's in some ways it's that sounds so

milk toast and I don't know like

that's worth millions of dollars but

like yes actually it is like a high

context person who understands the

company and the customers and the domain

making generally reasonable decisions

and sometimes bad ones and then

iterating on their bad ones and just

moving is so valuable.

>> Do you think it'll be 10x again in five

more years or is that starting to get

too crazy? Is the rate at which the most

valuable people are getting more

valuable staying the same accelerating

>> accelerating the counterforce is like

when are we going to or at what point

will investors get more concerned about

ill dilution and stockbased comp and

right which I kind of like weren't

throughout the 2010s late 2010s we had a

more of a like stockbased comp

conversation as an industry in like 2022

23 now we're definitely not talking

about it but like that's the counter

side. I think as if um without that push

on like dilution, I think people just

get paid more and more. That's probably

should.

>> How much do you care about your

valuation and multiple and

pardon the use of the word, but like the

engineering of those things?

>> I've historically

not cared and sometimes even done things

to like demonstrate my not caring. uh

which were good and bad. I care about

ARR and AR growth and like I do pay I

pay a ton of attention to those and

those are the metrics. I think I've now

I mean a lot of been through enough

valuation environments like 2010s, 2021,

2022 seen the like multiple roller

coaster where I just don't put a bunch

of stock in that or I used to not. I

think the thing I care a bunch about

that then will get me to caring about

these multiples is like the sentiment of

people who work at Vanta and they feel

like they're at a company that is

growing and growing and then both in

general growing and then growing

relative to other their other

opportunities in the market. There's a

part of the market that is raising money

every six months at like you know 5x the

prior valuation and like

that's a real talent competitor. Yeah.

And what about like things like tenders?

Have you done those historically?

>> We have not done them historically, but

they're I think that is the game on the

field. If you're doing a tender every

time and you got to do them.

>> Does this feel unhealthy?

>> Totally. But that in some like my

opinions about it sort of don't matter

like actually can have all the feelings

I want in whatever direction about

tenders. They are normalized and people

expect them and they expect it as part

of their comp. And if you are not giving

it to them, you got to give them a bunch

of other stuff to make it up.

>> How does all this affect your exit

ambitions like to go public or to you

know be sold or realize some endgame for

Vanta? Not at all.

>> Not really. Which is again a very like

founder privilege statement, but

basically it's like the the endgame is

like how long can we keep this going

for? And look like 99% of the big

independent, you know, software

companies in the United States are are

public. And so

like yes, IPO in that sense. I don't

have it as a bucket list item myself.

It's more of like means to an end.

Again, I think lots of people join

companies and want the bucket list item.

So, you know, founder privilege caveat

here again. But goal is big independent

standalone company

>> on all this stuff. Tools for building,

ways of building, kind all these kinds

of things I'm asking about. What do you

think is overhyped and underhyped?

Underhyped is knowing the company and

the customers

relative to knowing the skill set. It is

still really hard to train to hire,

train, onboard, make effective people

who join a company. Company marines make

this better and easier and like put

information at fingertips, but there is

still totally something to be said about

someone who's like been in a company,

knows how to navigate the company, knows

the customers, all of that. I'm at a

phase right now where like we value that

skill set and compensate that skill set

more than like the vertical skill set of

like you're good at sales, you're good

at customer success and would take a

worse salesperson on sales skill who

knows the Vanta pieces more. There's

something in that and I think especially

as a lot of the labs and like fasting AI

companies are like building out go to

market teams, I think they're actually

very much evaluating like you're a good

salesperson. I think that's slightly

off. And then I think as we think about

building agents for all of this, the

company context piece, the customer

context piece is probably being

relatively undervalued to like, oh,

you're just good at you are good

salesperson.

The less valuable skill slightly today

than it was four years ago.

>> What about overhyped? Anything that you

feel like is getting

>> token based pricing low margins for the

sake of having low margins? um custom

training models for the marketing value

>> to be able to say we post trained a

model on our stuff why explain why

that's

>> uh I think if you go talk to the the

inference providers and sometimes give

them depending on the provider give them

true CRM they will say like look the

reason to post train a model is cost and

you might then some businesses have that

need

but there is not a quality reason to do

it there's like kind of a marketing

reason to do it right now in this

environment and I think there's a lot of

post training for marketing reasons for

investors and for customers mostly for

investors actually

>> if one of those people were pitching the

the the other side of this of like the

value of post training what what is the

pitch to you like some one of these

companies comes to you and is like we'll

do XYZ for you what are they saying and

what do they say the benefits are

>> you are putting a stake in the ground of

being a real AI company that customer

investors like customers will notice I

think that's the primary one I do think

there's a secondary one in some use

cases of like a form factor thing and I

Especially with large enterprises where

it's like you want to deploy this piece

of software wallto-wall that you know

requires integrations and 17 people to

sign off and like oof that's a whole

thing like why don't you just give them

a like model specific to them for this

use case there's like form I think it's

a semi-reasonable

>> so so if I was one of these people and I

came into Vanta what what do they what

does post training literally mean like

what would it mean in your context like

what are you doing what are the steps

that you would go through with Yeah,

>> we would need a bunch of data from that

specific customer and then go write a

bunch of eval

data.

>> The process would be they're trying to

achieve something, they've got some

data, you tune a model to achieve the

thing to increase the eval.

>> Yeah. Basically,

>> and then sell them that.

>> Exactly.

>> On an ongoing basis.

>> Yep. And and your point is that that's

overrated because it doesn't actually

improve their

>> it can I think I'm a skeptical in a

couple of like do does everyone really

want to be handed a model or there's so

much around that from a user experience

perspective from a deployment

perspective form factor like it feels a

little like you know in the social media

or like our mobile apps when we like we

hadn't figured out pulled a refresh yet

right it's like kind of that it's like

there's something here I don't think

anyone actually wants to be handed a

model the same way it's like hitting a

refresh button I don't know that sounds

silly but like That's what we did in

2011. There's some version of that here.

It's like we haven't figured out how

this actually works and handing models I

think is not the right reasonable

iteration but like not the right

solution.

>> Is there anything else like in the

popular discourse that you think is

crazy? FDES.

>> I kind of think FDES are crazy or like I

think FDEES or actually I think it's a

great talent arbitrage the same way like

chief of staff is what FDE often is is

professional services. But I think if

you call it a professional services

role, that's a very different talent

profile than FDE in the current

discourse. And I think you're not going

to get the, you know,

Harvard CS grad who's like high agency

and wants to go do things and learn how

to build a business to go sign up to be

like pro- serve person number four or

number 12 at a company. I think there's

a real job there, but I think this like

FDE

wrapping around it is probably not going

to stay. I also think it's like right

the company that we all think does this

well is Palanteer, which I think they

probably do.

They have eight figure contracts. There

are some companies that have eight

figure contracts. I think we're using

all FTEEs in a place where we're, you

know, there's like five and six figure

contracts and those economics probably

are upside down. No, we're in again era

of like 30% growth margin better and so

that sort of works, but like that

doesn't feel sustainable.

>> When you're at like a a dinner in San

Francisco with other founders, what are

you talking about? Like are you talking

about models and which ones to use? What

are the actual topics of conversation

between founders right now?

>> There's definitely like talent war

pieces. There was a time, this is more

nine months ago, but it was like the,

you know, joy to go around the table and

complain about cursor and like their

their taking of everyone. Um, like the

cursor of the moment is like there's

definitely that piece. There is a bit I

mean I'll take FTDs of like do you

actually do this? Is it working? Like

what do you like where are you on this?

I mean right now you know personal

agents uh which ones do you have what

are actually useful? when you think

about the open-source stuff,

>> Chinese models, this that and the other,

what have you learned talking to people

around the world that are grappling with

these same questions?

>> Yeah, I was with our customers in France

a couple weeks ago, which was lovely.

One of the things I was very surprised

is is a lot of the French software

companies in Paris are using Chinese

models predominantly. And I initially

thought it was sort of a nationalism,

maybe anti-American, you know, just

something there. and stupidly sort of

suggested that and someone very quickly

corrected me and said like absolutely

not. We basically all switched to

Chinese models when Trump uh closed

Fable off to non-Americans and we just

kind of realized there's a huge business

continuity risk. We can't trust that if

we build a business on one of these

American models it'll always be

available. So we stopped doing that. If

you dream the most about where the

business could go over the next several

years, like force you to answer the

hundred bill, you know, the $250 billion

question or something.

>> What's the version of Vanta that could

look like that?

>> We think of Vanta as a security company.

Started with compliance, but like I

think the the best version of compliance

is proving the security you have. You've

got to have good security. And we think

we can and are moving into a bunch of

security domains. It's sort of a

platform pitch of like look, we've

already got the data, we've already got

the intelligence via the agent, we can

start stacking products on top of that

and more security focused products. As

we understand the security of all these

companies, the pressure on them to go

prove they're legitimate and industrial

grade is just going to go up. That's one

of the founding thesis of anti eight

years ago, but it's it like feels even

more true now. Whether they're working

with enterprises, governments,

regulators, lawmakers, you just have to

like prove your software is industrial

grade in lots of ways and that will

happen more and more in more and more

ways in the future. And Vanta is the

thing that connects both sides of that

call it marketplace.

>> So what's the direction of security?

Like this this is of course an

incredibly interesting topic like early

internet everything broke everything got

hacked this will probably be that times

10 or times 100.

>> Um does security mean you compete with

crowdstrike and places like that? Like

what does security mean and what's its

trajectory in this crazy era?

>> These models just are like so much more

persistent than people actually. And so

they will just like try nine quadrillion

things the way a person would sort of

give up after I don't know 9,000 right

and then in the course of that they find

things and chain things together and so

I think there is a little bit like a lot

of the discourse is around zero days and

there's definitely some of that these

models are finding that we didn't find

before or didn't publicly find before. I

think actually though what's more so

happening is these models are able to

chain like 17 benignish or benign on

their own things together and then like

really find something and like if you

watch the the open AI talk at RSA about

hugging face it's basically that it's

just like persistence and putting

together things that on their own people

would have been like that's low severity

I'll fix it in 90 days right anyway that

anyway but that update which I

is tough and we have to fight with

machines because it takes what was like,

oh that's important but low severity and

again 90 days and like I'm going to fix

this other stuff first. Like it just

turns the prioritization on its head

and saying it makes everything critical

isn't helpful because you're like well

what do you do then? Right? But I think

what that ends up looking like is you've

just got to fix stuff as fast as you

find it. And some of the prioritization

does need to go out the window.

But if you're fixing, you know, again,

if you're fixing things at machine

speed, you sort of don't have to

prioritize. So that's where I think

we're going to get to. But I think it'll

it'll be rocky as we get there.

>> So as I visualize that,

>> what that feels like to me is a constant

penetration test.

>> Yes.

>> Where an agent is trying to break in

like a white hack white hacker agent all

the time and then every time it finds

something, it's like got a buddy agent

that's a patcher

>> goes fix it. Yeah.

>> Is that like the ultimate product vision

then? for some parts of Vanta. Yes. Yes.

I think we can do that in very

compelling ways for the bulk of our

customers. I think CrowdStrike will do

it better for an enterprise, right? I

think this is where choosing where you

play and like what market segment is

most important there.

>> Is there a firm that's doing something

now that you start to encroach on like

of the traditional security?

>> A different market. I mean, take a like

okay your um ongoing like penetration

tester and you know remediator fixer,

right? We think we can do that for the

cloud providers like an AWS and Azure

like misconfigurations there classically

like right whis does that whis will do

it for its customers. Whee's customer

base starts at a multi,000 person

company and their price point count

starts at a multi,000 person company and

so we're more thinking about the

platform as where are we already

embedded with customers? where are they

unlikely to go pay $150,000 for a whiz,

but very well could pay 40 or 50 for

something suited to them. And so kind of

thinking through where are we already

strong and where are the the competitors

focused probably elsewhere but probably

on a more market segment.

>> How has your personal motivation

changed? Like you set out to build this

thing. I remember talking to you the

first time about this uh very charming

way you built the original product like

building an Excel first and it seems

very old school you know looking back

looking back on it and there's always

like the dog that caught the car thing

where like all right you built like this

huge software business amazing how has

your own motivation evolved or changed

through all this

>> like why keep going

>> it's interesting and challenging and it

changes all the time I mean I think

there's like I really like my job

sometimes I feel like I'm good at it

often I feel like I'm bad about at

that's fine. Like that's in some ways

not the point. Um, but it's changes and

it's different and when I feel like I've

gotten good at it, usually something

happens where then I feel, you know, it

it just changes and then I feel bad at

it again. And I really like that

dynamic. I think in

the beginning I had a lot more of a

feeling of people think I can't do this

and I think I can and I'm going to show

them. And I still have that, you know,

even to the like you don't think band is

gonna be 250 billion, like let me show

you. I still have it, but I think you

can probably tell there's like less of a

dark edge to it. Still a little dark

edge, but like there's less of it. It's

like, oh, cool. We got here now. We're

just going to see how far we can run in

a way that feels a little bit more like

fun and joyful. I did it. It's not

always joyful. I don't mean that, but

just like that feels it feels more, oh,

cool. Let's see how far we can go with

this. And I think we can go pretty damn

far. Whereas I think in the beginning it

was more like you don't think I can get

off the starting line. Let me show you.

Vanta automates compliance so your team

can spend less time on security reviews

and more time getting customers. Vanta

cuts audit prep by 82% and gives you

instant up-to-date proof of trust

without all the manual work so you can

close deals faster and with less

friction. Customers report a 526%

return on investment and more than

16,000 companies use Vanta, including

Ramp, Harvey, and Snowflake. Get started

with $1,000 off at vanta.com/invest.

Ridgeline is the only AI native

investment management platform that

brings the front, middle, and back

office together in one system. It gives

firms one place for their data and uses

AI agents to automate repetitive work

like onboarding, reconciliation, post

trade, compliance, and reporting so

teams can spend more time on investing,

serving clients, and growing the

business. Ridgeline is built to give you

time back that can change the trajectory

of your firm and be the inflection point

that takes your growth from incremental

to accelerated. Ridgeline also wants to

help asset and wealth managers

understand and improve their firm's

growth trajectory. So, they built an

interactive dashboard that lets you see

how your firm compares to 16,000 peers.

If you file a form ADV, your firm is

already in it. Visit

ridgeline.ai/trajectory

to see where your firm stands. Then talk

to Ridgeline about how you can do more

with the team you already have.

>> How surprised would the 8-year-old

version of you be at some specific skill

that you've developed in the way?

>> I'm probably surprised.

>> What's like the most surprising one that

you're now good at that you old you

would have said, "No way."

>> I like go to market more than I ever

would have guessed. Um

>> because why?

>> Well, I think it's like you get to talk

to like personable like friendly people

all the time.

>> I mean, I was like a terrible public

speaker and public public speaker being

um and actually I would get the most

nervous in front of my own team because

I cared the most about what they thought

about me and like and I was like, "Oh my

god, I'm representing you. I want to do

this so well." Exposure therapy was

helpful on that one. You like you just

do it and you do get better at it. But I

think the like thought of like being at

kickoff or at all company get together

in front of a thousand people on a stage

and I think it would have been like a

like I'm going to be bad at that

and I think the people around me would

have been like yeah yeah she'll be bad

at that like maybe she should you know

how much coaching can she get and you

know I think it's like anything else

it's like yeah if you work hard at

developing a skill you tend to get

better you have to put in the work but

like

>> in that one particular I'm very

interested in that one seems always high

leverage what matters to like you're

giving you've given however many

hundreds of these things like what makes

one good

>> like the trope of like no one remembers

what you say but they remember how you

felt it's so annoying but it is so true

for me at least like I do have to

believe in the content and if I just get

up and it is like content I feel like it

is content less I will also I will feel

that way and it will be obvious to

everyone you know so like you kind of

have to figure out your version of it

which for me I try to put real content

in and then also hold in my head like no

one's going to remember any of these

facts So that's not heart matters more

than mind.

>> So much more. Yeah.

>> Yeah. Yeah.

>> And the key to good heart is just like

is what?

>> Believing in it yourself. Like I don't

know, authenticity one-on-one on a

stage. Like people are pretty good at

reading one another. And when someone

when you feel like the person you're

talking to is like going through the

motions or doesn't really feel like it

or is or is like misleading you, maybe

also misleading themselves, you know,

like people can tell. they can't

entirely articulate what's happening,

but it's like something seems off. Um,

versus someone who is like authentically

into it, you know, even if you even if

they're into something kooky, that just

comes off.

>> What are the big trade-offs that you

struggle with right now? Like, you can't

do everything. You got to make

decisions. The stakes are higher than

ever. It's easier to build than ever.

>> Seems like a cool time to be doing what

you're doing, but there must be big

trade-offs that you struggle with. What

What are those for

>> Yeah. I mean one conversation or ha have

had and have is we have tried over the

last year to build in such an

agentforward way. Can talk through some

of like what that's look like.

>> What does agent mean?

>> Like why is that not just AI? Like why

does that mean?

>> I don't know. You get 2x revenue

multiple if you say agent. It's like 3x

if you say harness

could say harness more

prompt file like minus 3x you know.

So is it the but agent just means AI,

right?

>> You live in San Francisco. Sorry.

>> I'm Everyone's saying agent so much. I

don't even know what that means. It just

means AI, right?

>> Yes.

>> Okay.

>> Yes.

>> So keep going.

>> Yes. We've tried to build such a great

harness.

you're trying to build

such a great hardness for our customers,

but actually and

not build a bunch of SAS UI, you know,

it's like, oh, you want reporting, we

will have our agent go make charts for

you on demand based on all of our data.

We're not going to like put Tableau

inside of Vanta, which is probably what

we would have done in 2022, 2021 if we

had been building it then. And we

believe in this in like a short-term

customer outcome sense, but also in a

like medium to long term, like this is

what software will look like. And no one

is going to be putting Tableau inside

their products.

More joking than serious. Although some

people actually put Tableau inside their

products.

>> So there's an aspect of like the this

diffusion thing is just scary because

maybe the tractor takes 10 years,

tractor company takes 10 years and in

the meantime you were right but early

and therefore wrong.

>> Right. And therefore wrong, you know,

and you're kind of betting on the time

horizon there. And um the other version

of this actually big enterprises were

working with a a US enterprise trying to

close and they basically were like hey

maybe we want your AI features maybe we

won't but can you turn them off for now

why the answer is like cuz I because

it's a way easier to get a nonAI tool

through procurement and we want your

>> turn it on after we're in

>> right and like we don't really have an

off switch on you know you're like oh

didn't we go build that but you're like

gross like we don't want to build that.

Hopefully, we don't have to use it. We'd

so much rather take that time and effort

and build something, you know, actually

useful. Anyway, we're not we're not

going to build this off switch. But it's

just one of those where you're like

those trade-offs.

>> If you were an investor, which you used

to be,

>> yeah,

>> where would you be focused right now?

>> O, do not envy the job at all right now.

>> Why Why don't you envy it? as much as

I can like critique and make fun of on

the company side the like oh I think

people are mis thinking about some of

these businesses in a like very short

term way I think the FOMO

and what are your returns and like I saw

this tweet if you haven't like invested

in a lab or an inference provider in the

last four years you should just shut

down your firm because like what are you

doing um it feels like more acute uh on

the investor side than the company side.

And so it's like however hard I think my

life is, my life's not hard to be clear,

but like whatever these trade-offs are

that we're facing, it feels like more

echochambery,

more judged on incremental returns and

paper returns on the VC side than the

company side.

>> So what would you do? Where would you

where would you hunt?

>> Yeah, the labs and the inference

providers apparently. No. Um those feel

a little Well, we can debate whether it

played out, but like high entry prices

It feels like the discourse and kind of

the certainty around the open source

provide open source model providers and

then like the tooling and the companies

around them feel sort of disconnected.

It's kind of like oh we've all decided

the open source model prov like will be

very real

and then the ecosystem around them is so

much less built out than the big labs

and that just feels off to me. You

probably have better

>> what do you mean by ecosystem around

them?

>> If you think that a like a lab or is it

long lake is that what it's called? like

these like we're basically just going to

go deploy this technology and put AI in

these businesses.

>> Can you build one of those around the

open source providers? If you think like

it see like of course yes and I'm I'm

like sure on some level along like it's

doing that but like can you really grab

one of those models the way OpenAI is

grabbing its own stuff and just kind of

replicate that playbook. Basically a

bunch of the like lab playbooks seems

like they should apply to the open

source models

>> and it's just less mature. Yeah.

>> And so there's more to do there.

Exactly.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

>> Why Why isn't people Yeah. What am I

missing on that?

>> I just I think it's just like a pace

thing.

>> Yeah.

>> I think it's anything where these things

can go.

>> It's kind of like ironically private

equity or something what private equity

promised to do which was to shape

businesses up.

>> Yep.

>> Now they can much more easily.

>> Y

>> and so uh probably everything will get

way more efficient if it can

>> and the return will come from higher

margin, you know, more efficient

operations, whatever.

>> Yep. But that's that's like an

efficiency thing, not a generative

thing.

>> Yep. And so I guess what I'm more

curious about as you watch your peers

and people around you is where are the

green shoots on the generative side?

>> I mean, bunch of people starting

security cyber companies both because

the environment and like I see

proportionally more of those than other

things. A bunch of people attacking rev

like go to market technology which I

think is like makes ton of sense. I

think actually some of the you know old

SAS rev providers they should be

building all this stuff but it doesn't

seem like they are and actually they're

running more like PE ben spoon sort of

playbooks which is again a choice like a

maybe a reasonable choice. Robotics is

probably underplayed. I mean like

somewhat hot and hypy uh like that's not

a novel area but it's still definitely

underweighted compared to all the

software stuff. the models are also

getting like real damn good there to

state the obvious. So probably spend

time there.

>> What what else do you feel like you know

because of your unique path that others

don't yet fully appreciate? Over the

past couple of years, Vanta has spent

more time with governments at federal,

state, local levels inside the US,

outside the US. And

there is an appetite for modernization,

big stated priority of the current US

administration, but again exists outside

of the US too. And I think

the AI piece has created more FOMO in

like government officials where you know

they may have always known they did not

have modern processes or modern software

but it feels more of an imperative now

than it used to. So I think there's

something there.

Maybe here's a here's a broader answer.

All of the conversation around AI and

the technology has changed the priority

and upped the priority of a lot of

modernization. Sometimes it's within

governments, sometimes it's within

enterprises. We see this with actually a

lot of the cyber stuff in the CISOs we

talk to. their jobs are changing because

of AI and they're saying, "Oh, given AI

and like the risks from the agents, I

would like to overhaul my enterprise

risk program and I would like budget for

that." And I think if they kind of said,

"I want budget for my enterprise risk

program three years ago." People would

be like, "We'll talk about AOP maybe."

And I think because it's attached to AI,

they are much more likely to get that

budget today. So there is more of a

buying motion. What would be your big

pitch to come work at Vanta right now?

>> Oh, it's a fun stage. You get 16,000

customers

using a product, using agents. When you

ship things, they are in use by real

people getting like real feedback

instantly. It has product market fit.

You're just like going and experimenting

>> um with like fast iteration loops,

>> but early enough that you could still

>> But like you can move. Yeah. Yeah. We

let you move. Yes.

>> Yeah. Because it's such an amazing

Silicon Valley microcosm. Can you tell

like the most detailed version of the

Billboard war story that you've ever

told?

>> I was always very much a billboard

skeptic cuz it seemed like they didn't

actually or like who knows if they work.

The tracking is terrible, but like

founder like founder ego was why someone

would do a billboard. It's like cuz I

feel cool cuz my company has a

billboard. So I was always very anti-

billboard.

midsummer 2021

SAS conference which felt like a big

deal at the time like thank god we've

almost beyond that we decided or our

marketing team decided to try out of

home I was like super skeptical but it

was like fine whatever I

try it you know and we were going to put

something on the billboard and Sarah who

was our PMM at the time came up with

compliance that doesn't suck too much

and pitched to our head of marketing who

didn't like it cuz thought we were like

negging our users and was basically like

no don't think harder and much nicer but

like think harder and Sarah kind of

believed in it and so she went to me

which she usually does not like go she

is not a like go around her boss person

but like really believed in compliance

that doesn't suck too much and so took

it to me and I read it and I like

immediately left actually immediately

texted Andrew Reed, our investor, as

like, "What do you think? You have good

um internet meme taste. He loved it."

And so you're like, "Okay, let's try it.

Let's run it." So like, "What's the

worst that's going to happen?" People

will think we're obnoxious and then

probably forget in six months. Actually

seems like relative. Anyway, so we stand

the billboard up somewhere like near

Berlin Game.

It goes over so well. We tweet it. The

tweet goes viral. the tweet then is

still over the next couple months but

like ends up on our slash accounting as

a funnel right you're like oh this is a

gem and I think it it really worked

because like and it's our it's our brand

at our best and our marketing at the

best our our attribute is with a wink

but it's like you know we take our work

seriously but we don't always take

ourselves seriously and so I think there

was something to that that resonated and

then I think there was something to like

it was a little obscure but it wasn't so

obsc but it was like sufficiently

obscure where if you got it, you felt

like you got a secret anyway. And so

like compliance that doesn't suck too

much just worked. Okay. 22 market

crashes. Turns out there's a lot of

billboard inventory available on 101. So

we get this great spot, right, where

like 101 and 280 sort of intersect and

on this anyway great spot for like not

that much, especially in retrospect. And

we're like we joke and we're like, "Oh

yeah, we've like locked it up for years

like what?" And so we were known for

this billboard in this spot.

I think even on podcast I said the

contract was locked up for years. It was

not locked up for years, but that

billboard got famous. And so we people

would contact us and Sarah all the time

and be like, "How do you do billboards?

How do you do your billboards?" And

we're like, "Oh, we work with this

agency. We work with this guy." And so

we referred this guy all of this

business. So we just be like, "It's him.

It's him. It's him." All like millions

of dollars of business. Great.

Okay. Turns out in the background we did

not have a multi-year contract, which I

should have shown. Certainly if I was

going to say that on a podcast, not

really do what it says on the tin. And

the contract was basically like, you've

put the billboard up. That's it. Like

this this was like not a contract at

all. Multiple years go by,

Sarah's at like seeing one of her

friends for dinner, works at a startup,

and her friend was like, "Oh, it's so

sad you guys like gave up that billboard

spot. like why'd you do that? And Sarah

was like, "Pardon?" And they were like,

"Oh, yeah. We just signed for your

spot." And Sarah's like, "What? Will we

go back?" Or like, "Contract contract."

Contract written in crayon. There is no

contract. Basically, it's a placement

order.

Called the guy and he's like, "Yeah, you

know, it's a placement order. They they

paid more." So, we like swapped it out

underneath us. I go to founder of said

company and be like, "Hello, can I like

how much can I pay you?" And I am like

an extremely inelastic buyer here. Like

what can I pay you for this spot? And

he's like, "Nothing." And I'm like, "How

about I double?" I think he was paying

like a million and a half. And you're

like, "How about I give you three

just to get this spot?" And he's like,

"We're actually cash flow positive." So

like literally there is no like I'm in

an elastic seller.

And so we lost the spot. Things that

made me think where I was like, "Oh no,

Vanta's screwed." Honestly, losing that

billboard, I was like, we did probably

just lose a billion of market cap. Bad

omen.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Both bad omen

and like there is some market cap, you

know, like vibesy market cap decrease

that just happened here. Yes.

>> Is there anything I've missed a bet? Has

your curiosity, your attention that you

think is really important right now?

>> You see it in the data center

conversations

to some extent in the personal agent

stuff. It's like we just don't trust

software companies, tech companies the

way we used to. And that is like getting

worse year over year. And it's kind of

hard to imagine that inflecting back up

and getting to the like useful optimism

of 15 years ago. And so I think in that

companies showing that they are

trustworthy and industrial grade and

secure through lots of metrics and

actual definitions is like more

important than ever and will just get

more and more important. And again to a

host of customers, regulators,

lawmakers, auditors, etc. Vanta at 250

billion is like in the center of all of

those transactions

helping companies meet those high bars

or wherever those bars are set and then

conveying that like helping them go

convey that and accelerate their

business.

>> Another way of saying that like AI has

ushered in this extremely high

excitement but low trust.

>> Yeah, that's a good

>> era.

>> Yes. And Vant's job is

preserve the excitement but

>> increase yeah increase the trust and

like on legitimately so not just on

vibes on like yeah yeah

>> what will satisfy the market to trust

again

>> I think in a B2B context like businesses

I do think there's a bit of like there's

the vibes piece but there's a very real

data piece and it's like and I would

like to see specific things or specific

improvement curves or may have make

promises with maybe contracts behind

Right. I think that one's a much more

quoteunquote logical rational the way

like enterprise markets often are. I

think on the consumer side it is vibes

and I don't

that one seems very hard to turn. I do

not envy.

>> Do you trust them? Muse instinct etc.

>> big companies. No.

>> Why not?

>> It's not that there's anything

particularly interesting in my, you

know, email or, you know, chats or

whatever. like it's not my life's not

that interesting, but I would rather you

know just Google or like or just Apple

or just insert company here have that

information.

>> What's security like 5 years from now?

Like if you just wrap it up with like,

okay, here's here's we're going. We want

to be the person at the center of this.

Describe that state for us. security

from 5 years from now is faster, even

more intense, more offensive hopefully

in that like yes, we'll have more

attacks, but I think you need more like

white hat pushing back on all of that.

And just to get a speed that we haven't

had and I think you've got to get humans

to get to that speed, you've got to get

a lot of some amount of the human

decision-m out or humans are like

architecting systems and writing rules

but not making every single decision.

It's like falling from that

>> writing evals. Maybe that's all we're

doing in the future. We're all writing

evals all day long.

>> If you had to define what the next five

years of Vanta will be in one word, what

word do you pick?

>> Expansive.

I think we have this incredible base of

customers of data and now we get to go

build things on top of that. And it like

8 years to get here, we could go just

build stuff on top of it for the next

five or eight.

>> It's so cool that we did this 5 years

ago. So, here we are again. Thanks so

much for your time.

>> You know how small advantages compound

over time? That's true in investing and

just as true in how you run your

company. Your spending system is your

capital allocation strategy. Ramp makes

it smarter by default. Better data,

better decisions, better economics over

time. See how at ramp.com/invest.

As your business grows, Vanta scales

with you, automating compliance and

giving you a single source of truth for

security and risk. Learn more at

vanta.com/invest.

The best AI and software companies from

OpenAI to cursor to Perplexity use work

OS to become enterprise ready overnight,

not in months. Visit workos.com to skip

the unglamorous infrastructure work and

focus on your product. Ridgeline is

redefining asset management technology

as a true partner, not just a software

vendor. They've helped firms 5x and

scale, enabling faster growth, smarter

operations, and a competitive edge.

Visit ridgelineapps.com to see what they

can unlock for your firm.