Carta vs Eqvista vs Opagio: Platforms Compared

Introduction

Carta, Eqvista, and Opagio appear in the same founder shortlists, but each platform is built for a different unit of work. Carta is the dominant cap table incumbent — founded in 2012 and per its public materials supporting 50,000+ companies and 2.5M shareholders across cap table, 409A, equity plan administration, fund administration, scenario modelling, and compensation planning. Eqvista is the integrated cap table + 409A + Real-Time Company Valuation® challenger — per its public materials, the #1-rated 409A and equity management product on G2 and Clutch, with a stated target of $1T in client assets. Opagio is the UK-headquartered intangible asset platform — organised around the Opagio 12™ taxonomy and providing asset-level decomposition and method-specific valuation aligned to IFRS 3 / IAS 38 (UK and global) and ASC 805 (US).

The right choice depends on which job is the dominant one for the buyer right now. A US-domiciled founder building a venture-backed cap table will weigh different criteria than a US-domiciled startup needing 409A bundled with the equity admin, and both will weigh different criteria than a UK-domiciled CFO preparing for Series B+ exit and IP-backed lending where the asset-level decomposition is the substance of the conversation.

This three-way page is for founders, CFOs, and advisors shortlisting across all three. It does not attack any platform — Carta, Eqvista, and Opagio are credible operators each strong in their own domain.

TL;DR: Use Carta for venture-backed cap table management, fund administration, 409A, and equity plan administration — the dominant incumbent, particularly for US venture-backed startups and US-headquartered VC funds. Use Eqvista for US-domiciled startups wanting cap table + 409A + Real-Time Company Valuation® bundled into one integrated product, often as an affordable Carta-alternative for the equity admin job. Use Opagio when the conversation requires asset-level intangible decomposition — for Series B+ fundraising, exit preparation, PE diligence, IP-backed lending readiness, and audit-aligned PPA work.

About Carta

Carta is the dominant cap table and equity management platform in the US venture-backed startup ecosystem. Per Carta's public materials, the platform was founded in 2012 and supports 50,000+ companies with 2.5M shareholders. The product suite covers cap table management, 409A valuations, equity plan administration, fund administration (Carta is widely used by US VC funds for fund admin and LP reporting), scenario modelling and waterfall analysis, fundraising tools, and compensation planning (Carta Total Comp).

Carta's pricing (per Carta's public materials) ranges from free (Launch tier, for businesses with fewer than 25 stakeholders) through tiered subscription up to enterprise pricing for fund administration, with 409A typically as a paid add-on. The platform's data depth and ecosystem position are its most material strengths — Carta sits at the centre of the US venture-backed startup tooling stack, with strong network effects from the fund administration side.

Carta's strength: Dominant US venture-backed cap table and fund administration. The data depth, the ecosystem network effects, and the breadth of product coverage are hard to replicate.

About Eqvista

Eqvista is a US-headquartered cap table and equity management platform that bundles 409A valuations and Real-Time Company Valuation® into the same product. Per Eqvista's public materials, the platform is the #1-rated 409A and equity management product on G2 and Clutch, with a stated target of $1T in client assets. The product covers full equity admin (stocks, options, RSUs, warrants, convertibles), 409A for option pricing compliance, and an AI-powered Real-Time Company Valuation® tied to the share register.

Eqvista is widely positioned in the market as an affordable Carta-alternative for the cap table + 409A bundle, particularly for startups that do not need the fund administration or enterprise breadth of Carta but do need the integrated equity admin + valuation product.

Eqvista's strength: Integrated cap table + 409A + Real-Time Company Valuation® in a single product. For US-domiciled startups needing equity admin + valuation bundled together at a more affordable price point than Carta's enterprise tiers, the bundled approach is the natural fit.

About Opagio

Opagio is a UK-headquartered intangible asset platform organised around Opagio 12™ — a proprietary taxonomy of twelve value drivers covering customer capital, organisational capital, brand and reputation, human capital, technology, data, supplier and partnership capital, design and aesthetic capital, financial structure, regulatory and IP capital, sustainability and ESG capital, and innovation pipeline. Within those twelve drivers sits a comprehensive library of intangible asset types.

Opagio is delivered as a SaaS platform with three products: Opagio Growth Forecaster (free), Opagio Growth Forecaster Pro (paid Explore), and Opagio Intangibles (paid platform — the full discovery, valuation, and management environment). The Asset Valuator module applies asset-level methods (RFR, MPEEM, With and Without, Cost, DCF, market multiples) aligned to IFRS 3 / IAS 38 (UK and global) and ASC 805 (US).

Cap table functionality is not Opagio's primary focus — most founders already have a cap table system in place (Carta for US venture-backed, Eqvista for US bundled, SeedLegals for UK EMI, Pulley for affordable US, or a UK-domiciled alternative), and the valuable integration is between the intangible register and the cap table.

Opagio's strength: Asset-level intangible decomposition through Opagio 12™, continuous measurement, multi-pathway support (borrow, protect, fundraise, exit), and audit-aligned output for Series B+ diligence, exit preparation, and PPA work.

Three-Way Side-by-Side

The table below sets out a founder-and-advisor view of the three platforms across the criteria that come up most often in shortlist conversations.

Three-way criteria

How the three platforms handle the same founder

Example — When Opagio is the better fit: A UK B2B SaaS founder is preparing for a Series B and starting strategic acquirer conversations. Their value sits largely in customer relationships (NRR 124%), proprietary data and the engineering team, the brand, and two granted patents. The cap table is on SeedLegals (handling the EMI scheme). The investor's diligence team and the acquirer's accountants will probe each asset individually under IFRS 3 (UK and global) framing. Opagio's twelve-driver decomposition and the Asset Valuator's method-specific output are built for this conversation. Carta and Eqvista do not produce the asset-level decomposition.

Example — When Carta is the better fit: A US-headquartered Series B SaaS startup with 80 employees and an option pool, recent fundraise from a US-based VC fund, multiple option grants in flight, and a 409A required for option pricing. The lead investor uses Carta for fund administration and LP reporting on their portfolio. Carta's network effects (the VC fund is already on Carta, employees can access their equity portal, future investors will be on Carta too), data depth, and breadth of equity-related capabilities make it the natural fit for the venture-backed cap table job.

Example — When Eqvista is the better fit: A US-domiciled SaaS startup at Series A wanting a cost-effective integrated cap table + 409A + real-time valuation product. The team values the bundled approach (less tool sprawl than Carta cap table + Carta 409A + a separate real-time valuation product), and the G2/Clutch ratings give confidence in the 409A quality. The fund administration breadth of Carta is not needed — there is no plan to launch a fund. Eqvista's bundled product matches the need at a lower total cost than Carta's enterprise tiers.

Which Platform Owns Which Job

A useful framing is to map each platform to the specific founder job it is built to do.

Carta owns the US venture-backed cap table + fund admin job. Per Carta's public materials, the platform supports 50,000+ companies and 2.5M shareholders, and is widely used by US VC funds for fund administration and LP reporting. The network effects (founders, VC funds, employees, and future investors are all already on the platform) are real. For US venture-backed startups in particular, Carta is the default cap table choice and the rest of the ecosystem is structured around it.

Eqvista owns the US affordable bundled cap table + 409A + real-time valuation job. Per Eqvista's public materials, the platform is the #1-rated 409A and equity management product on G2 and Clutch, with the integrated bundle covering full equity admin, 409A, and Real-Time Company Valuation® in one product. For US-domiciled startups that want the cap-table-plus-valuation bundle without the enterprise pricing and breadth of Carta, Eqvista's positioning is sharp.

Opagio owns the intangible asset management job. From Series B onward, the founder's value question shifts from "manage equity and price the share" to "what intangible assets are driving the share price and how are they growing". For exit preparation, PE diligence, IP-backed lending readiness, audit-aligned PPA, and continuous CFO measurement of the intangible base, Opagio's twelve-driver decomposition and method-specific Asset Valuator are the platform-shaped fit. UK-primary jurisdictional positioning makes Opagio particularly relevant for UK-domiciled founders.

Note (jurisdiction): Carta and Eqvista are both US-primary; 409A is a US-specific compliance valuation (IRC §409A) and does not apply to UK-domiciled or other non-US startups. Opagio is UK-primary with explicit UK-IFRS / global IFRS / ASC 805 alignment. For UK-domiciled founders, the right cap-table partner is typically SeedLegals (EMI specialist) or a Carta UK footprint; for US-domiciled founders, Carta or Eqvista are the natural cap-table choices.

Can the Three Coexist?

Yes — and many founders use more than one platform at different stages.

A US-domiciled Series B founder might run Carta for the cap table, fund-admin-aligned with their VC investor, 409A, and equity plan administration, and Opagio alongside for the intangible asset register, Asset Valuator output supporting Series B+ fundraising narrative, exit-prep diligence material, and (when relevant) audit-aligned PPA cross-check. Different platforms for different jobs.

A US-domiciled cost-conscious Series A founder might run Eqvista for the bundled cap table + 409A + real-time valuation (instead of Carta's enterprise pricing) and Opagio alongside for the intangible asset register once the conversation shifts toward Series B.

A UK-domiciled founder might run SeedLegals for the EMI scheme and UK equity admin, Opagio for the intangible asset register, Asset Valuator, and Lending Readiness Report, with neither Carta nor Eqvista required (no 409A applicability, no need for the US-focused cap table).

A US VC fund might use Carta for fund administration and LP reporting, with Opagio at the portfolio level for tracking intangible value creation across investee companies.

The three platforms are complementary at different stages and for different roles. The substitution question only sharpens when the founder is choosing the single platform for one specific job at one specific moment.

FAQ

How do these three platforms differ at the simplest level?

Answer

Carta is a cap table + fund administration platform — its primary product is equity management and fund admin for venture-backed startups and VC funds. Eqvista is an integrated cap table + 409A + Real-Time Company Valuation® platform — its primary product is bundled equity admin with valuation for US-domiciled startups. Opagio is an intangible asset platform — its primary product is the asset-level decomposition that drives enterprise value. Three different jobs.

Which is best for a US venture-backed Series B startup?

Answer

For the cap table, 409A, fund-admin-alignment with the VC investor, and equity plan administration, Carta is the natural fit — particularly given the ecosystem network effects. For the intangible asset decomposition that the Series B investor's diligence team will probe (customer cohorts, organisational capital, brand, IP, key-person exposure), Opagio is the platform-shaped fit. The two coexist comfortably — Carta for equity admin, Opagio for intangible asset management.

Which is best for a US affordable Series A startup?

Answer

For the bundled cap table + 409A + real-time valuation product at an affordable price point, Eqvista is the natural fit (per Eqvista's public materials, top-rated on G2 and Clutch for 409A). For the intangible asset register once the conversation shifts toward Series B+, Opagio is the platform-shaped fit. Two platforms, two jobs.

Which is best for UK-domiciled founders?

Answer

For UK EMI scheme management and UK-friendly equity admin, SeedLegals is widely used. For venture-backed UK businesses, Carta has a UK footprint and is also useable. Eqvista's 409A core feature is US-specific and does not apply to UK-domiciled founders. For the intangible asset register and IP-backed lending readiness specifically, Opagio's UK-primary jurisdictional fit (explicit UK-IFRS, global IFRS, ASC 805 alignment plus integration with the UK IP-backed lending market) is the platform-shaped fit.

Does Opagio replace Carta or Eqvista?

Answer

Generally no — the three platforms address different jobs. The valuable pattern is "use the right cap-table platform for the equity admin job (Carta, Eqvista, SeedLegals, Pulley, etc.) plus Opagio for the intangible asset management job", rather than "replace cap-table-platform-X with Opagio". The exception is UK-domiciled founders who do not need US-specific 409A and have a UK-appropriate cap-table platform — for them, Eqvista is typically replaceable; Carta remains useable depending on their VC context.

How does pricing compare across the three?

Answer

Per the platforms' respective public materials: Carta uses tiered subscription pricing with a free Launch tier through enterprise, plus a paid 409A add-on. Eqvista uses tiered subscription pricing with equity admin tiers plus a 409A add-on, positioned as a more affordable alternative to Carta's enterprise tiers. Opagio uses tiered SaaS subscription pricing — a free Growth Forecaster, paid Growth Forecaster Pro, and paid Opagio Intangibles platform. For accurate current pricing, check each platform's public pricing page or quote directly.

Which is best for exit prep or PE diligence?

Answer

Opagio. Exit and PE diligence work is fundamentally asset-level — the acquirer's diligence team probes intangibles asset-by-asset (customer cohorts, organisational capital, brand, IP), and the post-close PPA under IFRS 3 (UK and global) or ASC 805 (US) is fundamentally asset-level. Carta's cap-table-and-fund-admin focus and Eqvista's share-level valuation product are not built for the asset-level decomposition that this work requires. Opagio's twelve-driver Asset Valuator output is.

Which is best for IP-backed lending readiness?

Answer

Opagio. UK IP-backed lending (NatWest, HSBC, and the broader UK lending market) operates on asset-level collateral assessments — separability, saleability, and legal strength tested against individual intangible assets, not the share-level company valuation or the cap table. Opagio's Lending Readiness Report uses the Asset Valuator output as the underlying valuation, in the shape UK lenders expect.

Where can I see Opagio in action?

Answer

Book a demo and a member of the Opagio team will walk through the Opagio 12™ taxonomy, the Asset Valuator, and the Value Drivers Register™ with a worked example relevant to your context. The demo is typically 30-40 minutes.

Closing

Carta, Eqvista, and Opagio are three credible platforms each strong in their own domain. Carta owns the US venture-backed cap table + fund admin job with significant ecosystem network effects. Eqvista owns the integrated cap table + 409A + Real-Time Company Valuation® bundle at affordable pricing. Opagio owns the intangible asset management job from Series B onward through exit, PE diligence, IP-backed lending, and audit-aligned PPA work.

The right choice depends on which job is the dominant one for the buyer right now. For most US-domiciled founders the answer is "the right cap-table platform plus Opagio" rather than "one platform to rule them all". For UK-domiciled founders the cap-table choice typically falls outside both Carta and Eqvista, and Opagio sits naturally alongside SeedLegals or another UK-appropriate platform.

The best way to know whether Opagio is right for your business is to see it in action against a real scenario. Book a demo — we will bring a worked example relevant to your context and walk through how the platform handles it.

Two-way comparisons: Opagio vs Eqvista Three-way views: Equidam vs Eqvista vs Opagio Companion pieces: Eqvista alternative — how to evaluate Opagio

Related reading

• Opagio vs Eqvista — Valuation and Equity Platforms Compared
• Equidam vs Eqvista vs Opagio — Three-way Comparison
• Eqvista alternative — How to Evaluate Opagio
• RFR vs MPEEM vs With and Without — Asset Valuation Methods Compared
• Purchase Price Allocation — Complete PPA Guide
• Intangible asset glossary — Customer Relationships
• Intangible asset glossary — Relief from Royalty
• Intangible asset glossary — Multi-Period Excess Earnings

Related Glossary Terms

Learn More

• View lesson →