LIVE INDEX 214 verified firms 41 countries $1.4B+ in disputed claims defended
Index / Microsoft / Compliance Assessment (ELP)
MICROSOFT · COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT (ELP)

Microsoft compliance assessment

A Microsoft compliance assessment establishes your Effective License Position — entitlements versus real deployment across Windows Server, SQL Server, Microsoft 365 and Client Access Licenses — so you find and fix gaps on your own terms, ahead of any SAM engagement or audit. This directory lists the firms that build that position for Microsoft estates, each with balanced pros and cons, in neutral order.

Last reviewed: 5 June 2026 · Reviewed quarterly · A directory, not a ranking

01 — THE MECHANICS

How Microsoft compliance assessment (elp) actually works

Microsoft licenses its core server products by physical core, with a 16-core minimum per server for Windows Server and SQL Server, and licenses users through subscriptions (Microsoft 365, Dynamics 365) and Client Access Licenses on a per-user or per-device basis. An Effective License Position reconciles three things that rarely match: what you have bought (the Enterprise Agreement, MCA or CSP entitlements), what is actually deployed and running (often under virtualization, where core counting and licence mobility rules bite), and what your contract actually permits.

The two pressure points a Microsoft assessment almost always surfaces are SQL Server core counting under VMware or Hyper-V virtualization — where licensing the host versus the virtual machine changes the number dramatically — and Azure Hybrid Benefit, where on-premises Windows Server and SQL licences are re-used in Azure but can be double-counted if the on-prem deployment is not decommissioned or correctly tracked. CAL coverage (user versus device), SPLA reporting for hosters, and mixed on-prem/cloud entitlements are the other common gaps.

Microsoft has leaned toward incentive-based “true-up to cloud” engagements run through SAM partners rather than purely punitive enforcement, which is precisely why an independent ELP matters: a SAM Engagement initiated by a Microsoft partner is measured against Microsoft’s read of your estate, so going in with your own defensible position changes the conversation.

How engagements run

A compliance assessment starts with an inventory: deployment data from your tooling, the entitlement records from your agreements, and the virtualization topology. The firm normalises that into an ELP, flags the gaps and the over-licensing (money you are wasting as well as exposure you carry), and gives you a remediation plan you can act on before a renewal or a SAM Engagement. Independent firms take no resale margin on the licences you end up needing; a reseller or Microsoft partner may run the same work inside a sales motion, a trade-off to weigh. This work sits ahead of a Microsoft audit defense engagement and feeds directly into a Microsoft EA renewal.


02 — THE FIRMS

Firms offering Microsoft compliance assessment (elp)

Listed in neutral alphabetical order with balanced pros and cons — a directory, not a ranking.

2Data Independent

HQ EU (verify) · Serves UK · Germany · France · Netherlands · US

Vendor- and tool-agnostic licensing boutique working across Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, Salesforce and IBM. Engagements run buyer-side, from compliance position through negotiation and ongoing optimization.

Pros
  • Independent and tool-agnostic: no vendor partnership or reseller relationship
  • Multi-vendor coverage in a single engagement across Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, Salesforce and IBM
  • Covers the full lifecycle from compliance assessment through negotiation and renewals
Cons
  • Newer entrant with a thinner public track record than long-established boutiques
  • Headquarters and team details are still being verified for the registry
  • Breadth across many vendors can mean less depth than a single-vendor specialist
MicrosoftOracleSAPSalesforce
View profile

Cadena Independent

HQ US · Serves US · UK · Germany · Netherlands · Australia · Singapore

ServiceNow-centric licensing and estate-reconciliation practice that also covers Salesforce, Oracle, Microsoft, SAP, IBM and Adobe. Reconciles entitlement against actual consumption ahead of renewals and reviews.

Pros
  • Independent advisory with no reseller relationship
  • Strong ServiceNow and SaaS reconciliation depth, a growing renewal-uplift pressure point
  • Broad multi-vendor coverage suited to mixed estates
Cons
  • Depth is weighted toward ServiceNow; other vendors are covered more lightly
  • Mid-size team rather than a global bench
  • Public outcome data is limited and not yet independently verified
ServiceNowSalesforceOracleMicrosoft
View profile

Directions on Microsoft Independent

HQ US (Kirkland, WA) · Serves Global

Independent Microsoft-licensing analyst firm and recognised authority on Microsoft licensing rules, roadmap and CAL/cloud mechanics.

Pros
  • Independent, recognised authority on Microsoft licensing rules
  • Deep, current knowledge of EA, cloud and CAL mechanics for an effective-license-position
  • Vendor-neutral analysis with no resale relationship
Cons
  • Microsoft-only; no coverage of other publishers
  • Analyst and advisory slant rather than full managed SAM
  • Boutique scale focused on a single vendor
Microsoft
View profile

HiSolutions Independent

HQ Germany (Berlin) · Serves DACH

German vendor-neutral consultancy with a SAM and audit-defense practice across the DACH region, fluent in German contract and works-council practice.

Pros
  • Independent and vendor-neutral with no reseller relationship
  • DACH-native, fluent in German contract and Betriebsrat (works-council) practice
  • Multi-vendor SAM across Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and Adobe
Cons
  • Coverage concentrated in German-speaking markets
  • Broad security and IT consultancy rather than an audit-only specialist
  • Lighter presence outside Europe
MicrosoftOracleSAPAdobe
View profile

Invictus Partners Independent

HQ Australia · Serves Australia · New Zealand · Singapore · UK · US

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.

Pros
  • Fully independent: no resale, implementation or vendor-side audit work
  • Founded by ex-vendor auditors who know the measurement methodology from the inside
  • Covers Oracle, SAP, IBM and Microsoft across the full negotiation lifecycle
Cons
  • Boutique scale rather than a global Big-Four bench
  • Strongest in APAC and English-language markets
  • Public outcome figures are self-reported
OracleSAPIBMMicrosoft
View profile

IPR-Insights Independent

HQ Hungary · Serves CEE · Germany · Austria · Poland · UK

Central- and Eastern-European SAM and audit-support boutique with its own SAM tooling, covering Adobe, IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and VMware.

Pros
  • Independent boutique with native CEE / EMEA coverage
  • Owns its SAM tooling, useful for ongoing estate measurement and ELP work
  • Broad multi-vendor coverage including VMware and Adobe
Cons
  • Strongest in CEE rather than globally
  • SAM-led; audit-defense depth lighter than dedicated defense shops
  • Public outcome data is limited and not yet independently verified
MicrosoftOracleSAPIBM
View profile

ITAA Independent

HQ Global · Serves US · UK · Germany · Australia · Singapore

Independent multi-vendor licensing practice covering IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and Tier-2 publishers, with a stated 100% impartial, buyer-side model.

Pros
  • States full impartiality with no vendor partnerships or resale
  • Broad multi-vendor coverage including Tier-2 publishers
  • Covers the full lifecycle from compliance assessment to renewals
Cons
  • Breadth across many vendors can mean less depth than a single-vendor specialist
  • Boutique scale rather than a global bench
  • Public outcome figures are self-reported
IBMMicrosoftOracleSAP
View profile

LicenseFortress Independent

HQ US · Serves US · Canada · UK · Germany · Australia

Buyer-side licensing boutique combining advisory with the ArxPlatform monitoring tool and a contractual protection model across Oracle, Microsoft, IBM and VMware.

Pros
  • Independent and buyer-side, with a contractual protection / guarantee model
  • Pairs advisory with continuous monitoring tooling (ArxPlatform)
  • Strong on Oracle and infrastructure licensing, including effective-license-position work
Cons
  • Tooling-plus-service model may not suit buyers wanting advice only
  • Strongest in North America
  • Outcome and guarantee terms are self-reported
OracleMicrosoftIBMVMware / Broadcom
View profile

Licensing Data Solutions (LDS) Independent

HQ Global · Serves US · UK · Germany · Netherlands · Australia

Independent boutique with strong IBM and VMware/Broadcom review depth and broader multi-vendor coverage, known for current licensing-change analysis.

Pros
  • Independent boutique with no reseller relationship
  • Strong, current IBM and VMware/Broadcom depth
  • Covers the full lifecycle across multiple vendors
Cons
  • Boutique scale rather than a global bench
  • Heaviest depth is IBM and VMware; lighter elsewhere
  • Public outcome figures are self-reported
IBMVMware / BroadcomSAPOracle
View profile

MetrixData 360 Independent

HQ Canada · Serves Canada · US · UK

Canada-native independent boutique combining audit defense with data-driven license optimization across IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, Adobe and VMware.

Pros
  • Independent, with a data-driven measurement approach to the effective-license-position
  • Broad multi-vendor coverage from a North-American base
  • Combines audit defense with ongoing optimization
Cons
  • Strongest in North America
  • Broad coverage can mean less depth than a single-vendor specialist
  • Public outcome data not yet independently verified
MicrosoftOracleIBMSAP
View profile

Redress Compliance Independent

HQ US / IE / AE · Serves Global

Buyer-side independent licensing advisory with one of the broadest multi-vendor footprints, covering Oracle, Microsoft, SAP, IBM, Broadcom, Salesforce, ServiceNow and Workday.

Pros
  • Fully independent and buyer-side: no vendor partnership, resale or commission
  • Among the broadest multi-vendor coverage of any independent
  • Covers the full lifecycle from compliance assessment and audit defense to renewals
Cons
  • Very broad coverage can mean less single-vendor depth than a niche specialist
  • Boutique advisory scale rather than a global Big-Four footprint
  • Reported claim-reduction figures are self-reported and not independently audited
OracleMicrosoftSAPSalesforce
View profile

Redwood Compliance Independent

HQ US · Serves US · Canada · UK

Independent boutique covering Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, Quest, VMware, Red Hat and SAP across audit defense, negotiation and optimization.

Pros
  • Independent, with broad multi-vendor coverage including Quest and Red Hat
  • Covers the full lifecycle across several publishers
  • Buyer-side model with no reseller relationship
Cons
  • Newer to the registry; track record still being verified
  • Broad coverage rather than deep single-vendor specialism
  • Public outcome data not yet independently verified
OracleMicrosoftIBMSAP
View profile

SAMexpert Independent

HQ UK · Serves EMEA · Global

Independent Microsoft and Azure licensing voice covering SAM, SPLA and cloud cost, with no Microsoft partnership.

Pros
  • Independent Microsoft / Azure specialist with no Microsoft partnership
  • Strong on SPLA, Azure cloud cost and effective-license-position work
  • Well-known public-facing independent commentary on Microsoft licensing
Cons
  • Microsoft-only focus; no multi-vendor coverage
  • Smaller boutique team
  • Less litigation-grade audit-defense positioning than dedicated defense shops
MicrosoftAzureSPLA
View profile

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.


03 — INDICATIVE OUTCOMES

What this work can move

Indicative only — the levers that shape the number, not a promise of any specific result.

The figures below are indicative and illustrate where value typically sits in a Microsoft ELP. They are not quotes, not guarantees, and no specific outcome figures are published until the verified registry is live.

  • SQL Server core reconciliation (indicative): correcting host-versus-VM core counting under virtualization is frequently the single largest swing, in either direction — it can reveal real exposure or significant over-licensing.
  • Azure Hybrid Benefit clean-up (indicative): ensuring on-prem licences re-used in Azure are not also counted on-premises removes a recurring double-count.
  • CAL right-sizing (indicative): moving between user and device CALs to match how the estate is actually used keeps the number aligned to need.
  • Shelfware recovery (indicative): an ELP often surfaces paid-for entitlements that are unused and can be reharvested before the next true-up.

04 — RELATED

Related Microsoft pages & services

The vendor hub, adjacent services, and the same service for other publishers.


FAQ

Common questions

Direct answers to the questions Microsoft buyers ask most.

Q

Is a Microsoft SAM Engagement the same as an audit?

Not formally, but the practical effect is similar. A SAM Engagement or SAM Optimization is run through a Microsoft partner and measures your deployment against Microsoft’s entitlement records; the outcome can still be a true-up bill. An independent compliance assessment gives you your own Effective License Position first, so you enter any SAM Engagement with a defensible number rather than accepting the partner’s read.

Q

How is SQL Server core licensing counted under virtualization?

SQL Server is licensed per physical core with a 16-core minimum, but under virtualization you can license either the physical host (covering unlimited VMs with Software Assurance) or individual virtual machines by their virtual cores. Which is cheaper depends on density and mobility, and getting the choice wrong is the most common and most expensive Microsoft finding. A compliance assessment models both.

Q

Does Azure Hybrid Benefit risk double-counting our licences?

It can. Azure Hybrid Benefit lets you re-use eligible on-premises Windows Server and SQL Server licences (with Software Assurance) to reduce Azure cost, but if the on-prem instances are not decommissioned or are still counted as deployed, the same licence is effectively claimed twice. An ELP reconciles the on-prem and Azure sides so the benefit is applied cleanly.

Q

When should we run a Microsoft compliance assessment?

Before an Enterprise Agreement renewal, before accepting a SAM Engagement invitation, and after any major change — a virtualization project, an Azure migration, an acquisition. The point is to hold your own defensible position before Microsoft or its partner forms one for you.

Q

Do you recommend one firm over another?

No. This is a directory, not a ranking. Firms are listed in neutral alphabetical order with balanced pros and cons so you can weigh them yourself. The matching service routes your brief to firms that cover Microsoft compliance work; it never tells you who is best.

Q

Is the directory free?

Yes. Browsing the directory and using the matching service are free for buyers. We publish no prices or fees and take no money from software publishers.

No cost to buyers

Facing a Microsoft SAM Engagement or EA renewal?

Microsoft and its SAM partners already have their read of your estate. Tell us your situation and we route your brief to firms that build an independent Microsoft Effective License Position. The directory and matching are free for buyers — no markup, no referral pressure, no firm is recommended over another.