A compliance assessment — building an effective licence position, or ELP — reconciles what is genuinely deployed against what you are entitled to, so you know your exposure before Autodesk raises it. With Autodesk now almost entirely named-user subscription, the recurring questions are inactive assigned users, token-based Flex consumption and any non-genuine or out-of-maintenance installs.
Last reviewed: 5 June 2026 · Reviewed quarterly · A directory, not a ranking
Autodesk retired perpetual licences for most products in 2021 and moved to named-user subscriptions, where each licensed person is entitled to use the software on multiple devices but seats cannot be shared. On top of that sit the AEC, Product Design & Manufacturing and Media & Entertainment Collections, and Flex, a pre-paid token model for occasional users. An effective licence position pulls these together.
Few firms specialise in Autodesk alone, so the list below pairs an Autodesk-focused independent with vendor-agnostic independents whose ELP practice covers Autodesk-class engineering software. Autodesk is described factually; this is information, not advice.
Listed in neutral alphabetical order with balanced pros and cons — a directory, not a ranking. Autodesk has few dedicated specialists, so the list pairs an Autodesk-focused independent with vendor-agnostic independents whose ELP remit covers it.
Vendor-agnostic licensing boutique founded by ex-vendor auditors. Does not resell, implement or conduct audits, focusing solely on buyer-side Oracle, SAP, IBM and Microsoft defense and negotiation.
Independent multi-vendor licensing practice covering IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and Tier-2 publishers, with a stated 100% impartial, buyer-side model.
German-speaking audit-consulting boutique specialising in Oracle and Autodesk for the DACH market, with no Oracle or Autodesk partnership.
Buyer-side independent licensing advisory with one of the broadest multi-vendor footprints, covering Oracle, Microsoft, SAP, IBM, Broadcom, Salesforce, ServiceNow and Workday.
DEMO — listings are compiled from public information and labelled demo until the verified registry is live. Firms are listed alphabetically, never ranked. Independence is shown as a pro; a reseller, Big-Four or vendor-side audit relationship is shown as a con — each a factual trade-off for you to weigh.
Indicative only — the levers that shape the number, not a promise of any specific result.
Indicative only. The value of an Autodesk ELP is mostly defensive: knowing your position before a Genuine-software approach or a true-up lets you remediate quietly — reassigning idle seats, correcting Flex classifications, replacing non-genuine installs — rather than negotiating under a compliance claim.
Buyers who run an ELP ahead of renewal typically find a share of named-user seats reclaimable and some Collection users who could move to single-product or Flex. Any specific figure is indicative and self-reported until the verified registry is live.
The vendor hub, adjacent services, and the same service for other publishers.
Direct answers to the questions Autodesk buyers ask most.
An ELP reconciles every Autodesk entitlement — named-user subscriptions, Collections, Flex tokens and any legacy perpetual licences — against what is actually installed and used, producing a net position of compliant, over- or under-licensed. It is the factual base for any remediation or negotiation.
It is a compliance approach rather than a formal contractual audit, but it can surface non-genuine, cracked or out-of-maintenance installs and lead to a true-up or purchase demand. Building your own ELP first means you find and fix those installs on your terms.
Autodesk is a specialist engineering-software publisher, so dedicated Autodesk ELP boutiques are rare. The list pairs an Autodesk-focused independent with vendor-agnostic independents whose ELP practice covers Autodesk-class software; their Autodesk-specific depth varies and is noted as a factual trade-off, not a ranking.
No. This is a directory, not a ranking. Firms appear in neutral alphabetical order with balanced pros and cons. Independence is shown as a pro; breadth versus single-vendor depth is noted as a con. No firm is recommended over another.
Yes. The directory and the matching service are free for buyers. We publish no prices or fees and take no money from software publishers.
Tell us your Autodesk estate and we route your brief to firms that build effective licence positions covering Autodesk. The directory and matching are free for buyers, no vendor ever sees your brief, and no firm is recommended over another.
Our weekly dispatch on vendor audit programs, regional developments and one buyer move. Subscribe to The Licensing Radar.