SOC 2 Certification: Is SOC 2 Actually a Certification?

One of the most common questions we hear from clients early in their compliance journey is whether SOC 2 is a certification. The short answer: it is not. At Agency, we help companies navigate this distinction every day, and getting it right matters more than most people realize.

SOC 2 is an attestation report — an independent CPA firm's opinion on whether your organization's controls meet the Trust Service Criteria defined by the AICPA. There is no "SOC 2 certified" status, no certificate issued, and no pass/fail binary outcome. When companies claim they are "SOC 2 certified," they are using imprecise language that misrepresents how SOC 2 works. The correct statement is that an organization has received an unqualified (clean) SOC 2 report from a licensed CPA firm, meaning the auditor found no material exceptions in the design or operating effectiveness of the evaluated controls.

This distinction matters because it affects how buyers evaluate vendor compliance, how organizations represent their security posture, and how the SOC 2 report is interpreted during procurement. This guide explains the difference between an attestation and a certification, why the "SOC 2 certified" misconception persists, what a SOC 2 report actually contains, and what procurement teams and security reviewers should look for when evaluating a vendor's SOC 2 compliance claims.

For a complete overview of the SOC 2 framework, see the complete guide to SOC 2. For specific compliance requirements, see the SOC 2 compliance requirements guide.

Attestation vs Certification: The Fundamental Difference

What Is an Attestation?

An attestation is an independent auditor's examination and opinion on a subject matter — in the case of SOC 2, the auditor examines management's assertion that its controls meet the Trust Service Criteria and issues a written opinion on whether that assertion is fairly stated. The auditor does not "certify" the organization. Instead, the auditor provides one of four opinion types:

Opinion Type	Meaning
Unqualified (clean)	Controls are suitably designed and operating effectively; no material exceptions found
Qualified	Controls are generally effective, but one or more material exceptions exist in specific areas
Adverse	Controls have significant deficiencies; the auditor cannot support management's assertion
Disclaimer of opinion	The auditor was unable to obtain sufficient evidence to form an opinion

The SOC 2 attestation is governed by SSAE 18 (Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements No. 18), issued by the AICPA. Only licensed CPA firms can perform SOC 2 attestation engagements.

What Is a Certification?

A certification is a formal recognition — typically issued by an accredited certification body — that an organization's management system meets a defined international standard. The certification body conducts an audit, and if the organization meets the standard's requirements, a certificate is issued with a defined validity period.

ISO 27001 is a certification. A certification body accredited by a national accreditation authority (such as ANAB in the US or UKAS in the UK) audits the organization's information security management system (ISMS) against the ISO 27001 standard. If the organization meets all requirements, the certification body issues a formal certificate valid for three years, subject to annual surveillance audits.

The Key Differences

Dimension	SOC 2 (Attestation)	ISO 27001 (Certification)
What is issued	An auditor's opinion report	A formal certificate
Who performs it	Licensed CPA firms	Accredited certification bodies
Outcome	Opinion (unqualified, qualified, adverse, or disclaimer)	Pass or fail (certificate granted or denied)
Validity period	Covers a specific observation period; no formal expiration but typically renewed annually	Three-year certificate with annual surveillance audits
Governing standard	SSAE 18 (AICPA)	ISO/IEC 27001 (ISO)
Accreditation requirement	CPA licensure	Certification body accreditation (ANAB, UKAS, etc.)
Public disclosure	Report shared under NDA; not publicly posted	Certificate can be publicly displayed
What it evaluates	Controls against Trust Service Criteria	Information security management system against ISO 27001 requirements

The critical distinction: SOC 2 results in a report containing an auditor's opinion. ISO 27001 results in a certificate. You cannot be "SOC 2 certified" because there is no certification mechanism in the SOC 2 framework.

Why the "SOC 2 Certified" Misconception Persists

Despite the clear technical distinction, "SOC 2 certified" remains one of the most common phrases in vendor marketing, sales conversations, and procurement questionnaires. Several factors drive this persistence, and we see every one of them regularly in our advisory work.

Marketing Language Simplification

Many organizations simplify "We have received an unqualified SOC 2 Type II report" to "We are SOC 2 certified" because the latter is shorter, sounds more authoritative, and is easier for non-technical audiences to understand. Marketing teams, sales representatives, and even compliance professionals use "certified" as shorthand — not out of intent to mislead, but because the accurate terminology is cumbersome.

Confusion with Other Frameworks

In our experience, companies pursuing multiple compliance frameworks encounter genuine certifications (ISO 27001, PCI DSS, HITRUST) alongside SOC 2. When all frameworks are discussed in the same context — "We're ISO 27001 certified, PCI DSS compliant, and SOC 2 certified" — the certification label gets applied uniformly even where it does not technically apply.

Vendor and Platform Marketing

GRC platforms, consulting firms, and compliance service providers frequently use phrases like "get SOC 2 certified" or "achieve SOC 2 certification" in marketing materials because these terms match what buyers search for. The search volume for "SOC 2 certification" significantly exceeds "SOC 2 attestation" or "SOC 2 report," creating a market incentive to use the technically incorrect term.

Procurement Questionnaire Language

Many security questionnaires and vendor assessment forms ask "Is your organization SOC 2 certified?" or include a checkbox for "SOC 2 Certification." This reinforces the misconception from the buyer side, and vendors answering "yes" perpetuate it further.

Limited Understanding of Audit Frameworks

Most stakeholders outside of compliance and audit functions do not distinguish between attestations, certifications, and assessments. For a CEO, CTO, or sales leader, the practical meaning of "we passed our SOC 2 audit" and "we are SOC 2 certified" feels identical — even though the second statement is technically inaccurate.

What a SOC 2 Report Actually Contains

Understanding what a SOC 2 report includes helps clarify why it is an attestation report, not a certification.

Report Sections

Section	Contents
Independent auditor's report	The CPA firm's opinion on whether management's assertion is fairly stated
Management's assertion	Management's statement that the system and controls meet the applicable Trust Service Criteria
System description	Detailed description of the services, infrastructure, software, people, procedures, and data covered by the report
Trust Service Criteria and related controls	The specific criteria evaluated and the controls the organization has implemented to meet each criterion
Tests of controls and results	The auditor's testing procedures and findings for each control, including any exceptions identified
Other information (optional)	Additional context provided by management that is not covered by the auditor's opinion

What the Auditor's Opinion Means

The auditor's opinion is not a pass/fail grade. It is a professional judgment about whether the organization's controls meet the Trust Service Criteria. An unqualified opinion means the auditor found no material exceptions — but it does not mean the organization is flawless. Controls may have minor observations that do not rise to the level of exceptions. The report documents everything — strengths and weaknesses alike — giving the reader a nuanced view of the organization's control environment.

This transparency is actually a strength of the SOC 2 model compared to binary certifications. A SOC 2 report tells you not just whether an organization passed, but how they performed across each control area, what exceptions were found, and how those exceptions were addressed.

What "SOC 2 Compliant" Actually Means

When an organization says it is "SOC 2 compliant," the most accurate interpretation is that the organization has received a SOC 2 report with an unqualified (clean) opinion from a licensed CPA firm. However, "SOC 2 compliant" is itself an informal term — the AICPA does not define a "compliant" status.

What to Verify

When a vendor claims SOC 2 compliance, we recommend verifying the following:

• Report existence: Request the actual SOC 2 report. If the vendor cannot produce one, the claim is unsupported.
• Report type: Determine whether the report is Type I (controls design at a point in time) or Type II (controls design and operating effectiveness over an observation period). Type II provides stronger assurance.
• Observation period: Confirm the report covers a recent period. SOC 2 reports are typically renewed annually; a report more than twelve months old may not reflect current practices.
• Opinion type: Read the auditor's opinion. An unqualified opinion is the standard expectation. A qualified opinion includes exceptions that should be evaluated for their impact on your risk assessment.
• Trust Service Criteria scope: Confirm which criteria were included. Security (Common Criteria) is mandatory; Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality, and Privacy are optional. Your requirements may demand specific criteria that the vendor's report does not cover.
• Exceptions: Review any exceptions documented in the report. Exceptions are not automatic disqualifiers, but they should have remediation plans and the severity should be evaluated in context.
• CPA firm: Verify the report was issued by a licensed CPA firm. SOC 2 attestation engagements can only be performed by CPA firms.

Correct Terminology for SOC 2

Using accurate terminology demonstrates compliance maturity and avoids misrepresentation. We recommend adopting precise language from the start of your compliance program.

Recommended Language

Instead of...	Use...
"We are SOC 2 certified"	"We have completed a SOC 2 Type II examination"
"We have SOC 2 certification"	"We have a current SOC 2 Type II report"
"We passed SOC 2"	"We received an unqualified SOC 2 Type II report"
"SOC 2 certificate"	"SOC 2 report" or "SOC 2 attestation report"
"Certified SOC 2 compliant"	"SOC 2 examined" or "SOC 2 attested"

When It Matters

Using the correct terminology is particularly important in:

• Formal procurement responses: RFPs, security questionnaires, and vendor assessments reviewed by auditors and compliance professionals who know the distinction
• Contractual language: Contracts that reference SOC 2 compliance should use precise terms to avoid misrepresentation
• Marketing materials: While common, "SOC 2 certified" in marketing creates expectations that do not match the actual deliverable
• Board and investor communications: Accurate representation of compliance status demonstrates governance maturity

When It Matters Less

In casual sales conversations, website trust badges, and general marketing, the distinction between "SOC 2 compliant" and "SOC 2 certified" is widely understood to refer to the same thing — having a current SOC 2 report. While technically imprecise, the commercial impact of using "certified" versus "compliant" is minimal in these contexts. The risk arises when a company uses "SOC 2 certified" without actually having a SOC 2 report at all.

How Other Compliance Frameworks Compare

Understanding the compliance landscape helps contextualize where SOC 2 fits relative to actual certifications.

Framework	Type	What Is Issued	Validity
SOC 2	Attestation	Auditor's opinion report	Covers observation period; renewed annually
ISO 27001	Certification	Formal certificate	Three years with annual surveillance
PCI DSS	Assessment/Certification	Report on Compliance (ROC) or Self-Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ)	Annual renewal
HITRUST	Certification	HITRUST CSF Certification	Two years with annual interim assessment
FedRAMP	Authorization	Authority to Operate (ATO)	Continuous monitoring; reauthorization varies
SOC 1	Attestation	Auditor's opinion report	Covers observation period; renewed annually

SOC 2 and SOC 1 are the only major frameworks in the table that are purely attestations. ISO 27001, HITRUST, and PCI DSS include formal certification or assessment mechanisms. This is why the "certification" label gets incorrectly applied to SOC 2 — it exists alongside actual certifications in most organizations' compliance programs.

For SOC 1 versus SOC 2 differences, see the SOC 2 vs SOC 1 differences guide.

What Buyers Should Look For

Red Flags in SOC 2 Claims

Red Flag	What It Means
Claims SOC 2 certification but cannot produce a report	The claim may be aspirational or fabricated
Provides a summary or excerpt rather than the full report	The full report may contain exceptions the vendor does not want to share
Report is more than twelve months old	The vendor may have lapsed in their annual audit cycle
Report covers only Type I	The vendor has not demonstrated sustained operating effectiveness; acceptable for initial evaluation but insufficient for long-term partnerships
Report excludes Availability or other relevant criteria	The report scope may not cover the assurance areas most relevant to your use case
Auditor's opinion is qualified or adverse	Material exceptions exist that require evaluation against your risk tolerance

Best Practices for Evaluating SOC 2 Reports

1. Always request the full report, not a summary, bridge letter, or cover page
2. Read the auditor's opinion first — it tells you whether the report is clean or contains exceptions
3. Review the system description to confirm the services you use are in scope
4. Check the observation period to ensure the report is current and covers a meaningful duration (six to twelve months for Type II)
5. Evaluate any exceptions in context — a single minor exception is different from multiple exceptions in access management or change management
6. Verify the CPA firm is a licensed, reputable firm with SOC 2 audit experience

Key Takeaways

• We consistently see confusion between attestation and certification cause real problems in procurement conversations — SOC 2 is an attestation report, not a certification, and there is no "SOC 2 certified" status or certificate issued
• What we tell clients: the SOC 2 report contains an auditor's opinion on whether controls meet the Trust Service Criteria; the outcome is an opinion (unqualified, qualified, adverse, or disclaimer), not a pass/fail grade
• We recommend understanding that ISO 27001 is a certification with a formal certificate while SOC 2 is an attestation with an opinion report — the mechanisms are fundamentally different
• In our experience, the "SOC 2 certified" misconception persists due to marketing simplification, confusion with other frameworks, and procurement questionnaire language
• What we recommend when evaluating vendor SOC 2 claims: always request the full report and verify report type (Type I vs Type II), observation period currency, opinion type, criteria scope, and any exceptions
• We advise adopting correct terminology from the start — "We have a current SOC 2 Type II report" instead of "We are SOC 2 certified" — because it demonstrates compliance maturity
• Using "SOC 2 compliant" is acceptable informal shorthand when backed by an actual report; using "SOC 2 certified" without a report is misrepresentation

Frequently Asked Questions

If SOC 2 is not a certification, why does everyone call it one?

What we tell clients is that the term "SOC 2 certification" persists because it is simpler than the accurate language, aligns with how other compliance frameworks (ISO 27001, HITRUST) describe their outcomes, and matches what buyers search for online. Marketing teams, sales organizations, and even compliance professionals use "certified" as shorthand. Based on what we see, the distinction rarely creates practical problems in sales conversations, but it matters in formal procurement, contractual language, and when evaluating whether a vendor actually has a SOC 2 report versus merely claiming compliance.

Does using "SOC 2 certified" instead of "SOC 2 attested" have legal implications?

Based on what we see in practice, using "SOC 2 certified" does not create legal exposure in most commercial contexts as long as the organization actually has a current SOC 2 report. However, what we tell clients is that if an organization claims to be "SOC 2 certified" without having a SOC 2 report, that misrepresentation could have legal consequences — particularly if a customer relied on the claim during procurement and suffered a security incident. The AICPA does not enforce trademark claims around casual usage, but we recommend that contractual representations about compliance status always be precise.

What should I say instead of "We are SOC 2 certified" in a sales call?

What we recommend is straightforward: in casual sales conversations, "We have a current SOC 2 Type II report" or "We've completed our SOC 2 Type II audit" are accurate and equally effective. Most enterprise buyers understand these phrases and will request the full report for review. If the buyer asks "Are you SOC 2 certified?" you can respond with "We have a current SOC 2 Type II report with a clean opinion — I can share that with you under NDA." This is accurate, professional, and answers the buyer's underlying question.

Can a SOC 2 report ever be "failed"?

What we tell clients is that there is no formal pass/fail mechanism in SOC 2. However, a report with an adverse opinion or significant qualified exceptions effectively communicates that the organization's controls have material deficiencies. Based on what we see, most enterprise buyers treat a qualified or adverse report as a negative finding. In practice, organizations that discover significant issues during audit preparation often delay the engagement to remediate rather than receive a report with exceptions — so adverse opinions are rare in issued reports.

How do I verify that a vendor actually has a SOC 2 report?

What we recommend is requesting the full SOC 2 report directly from the vendor. There is no public registry of SOC 2 reports (unlike ISO 27001 certifications, which can sometimes be verified through certification body databases). The vendor should provide the complete report under NDA. Based on what we see, you should verify the report is issued by a licensed CPA firm, covers a recent observation period, and includes the services relevant to your use case. If a vendor claims SOC 2 compliance but cannot produce a report, the claim is unsupported.