The ten firms below all build Microsoft effective license positions — reconciling Microsoft 365 assigned seats against active use, counting SQL Server and Windows Server cores, checking CAL coverage and Azure Hybrid Benefit eligibility, and answering SAM engagement letters from a measured position — but they span independent boutiques, a managed-SAM house, a reseller, a Big-Four practice and a SAM firm that also works vendor-side. They appear strictly alphabetically and are compared on facts only; the full firm list is on the Microsoft compliance assessment page, and the selection guide covers how to evaluate candidates.
Published 20 February 2026 · Last reviewed 19 March 2026
The order below is alphabetical and means nothing else. Each entry reuses the balanced pros and cons from the firm’s own directory profile, so what you read here matches the rest of the site. Independence from resellers, auditors and publishers is stated as a pro; reseller, Big-Four or vendor-side ties are stated as a con — factual trade-offs in both directions, never a verdict.
The registry’s Microsoft × compliance assessment cell lists twenty-eight verified firms. We selected ten for documented ELP practice depth and a deliberate mix of provider types — seven independents, one reseller-attached practice, one Big-Four firm and one large SAM firm with vendor-side audit ties — so the incentive contrasts in the comparison are real rather than theoretical. The full cell, with every firm covering this work, is at the Microsoft firm directory.
Compliance assessment is one of the seven services this directory indexes — the service hub explains what an effective license position is and how engagements run. On Microsoft the 2026 stakes are specific: a current ELP is both the strongest answer to a SAM engagement letter and the only reliable baseline for the EA-to-MCA-E migration, because once EA price levels stop carrying over, what you actually deploy — from the E3/E5 split to SQL Server core and CAL positions — is what you will be asked to commit to. An assessment done on your clock keeps that number yours.
Large US-headquartered multi-vendor ITAM and SAM services firm, ISO/IEC 19770 certified, with a global delivery bench across eleven major markets. Its Microsoft ELP work runs on a mature, certified methodology at enterprise scale — alongside vendor-side engagements that are the trade-off to note.
Pros: Deep multi-vendor ITAM and SAM tooling experience at enterprise scale · ISO/IEC 19770 certified processes and a large global delivery team · Established Microsoft SAM practice with mature methodology.
Cons: Conducts IBM audits on the vendor side, a direct conflict of interest for IBM-defense work · Also a Microsoft SAM partner, so incentives are not purely buyer-side · Large-firm engagement model rather than an independent boutique.
Major US value-added reseller offering multi-vendor licensing advisory and compliance work alongside its core resale business, serving the US, Canada and the UK. Its assessment capability draws on enterprise-agreement familiarity at procurement scale — inside a sales motion, which is the incentive fact to weigh.
Pros: Broad multi-vendor catalogue knowledge and procurement scale · Established advisory team familiar with enterprise agreements · Wide North American and UK reach.
Cons: A reseller of vendor licenses, a potential conflict with buyer-side audit defense · Advisory sits inside a sales motion rather than an independent practice · Not a dedicated audit-defense specialist.
Big Four professional-services firm headquartered in the UK with a multi-vendor software advisory practice and global coverage across eleven major markets. On a Microsoft assessment it brings cross-functional reach — contract, tax and IT advisory in one engagement — with the structural conflicts of a Big Four firm stated below.
Pros: Global footprint and large advisory bench across every major market · Broad cross-functional capability spanning tax, contract, and IT advisory · Brand familiarity with enterprise procurement and audit committees.
Cons: Big Four firm that is also appointed by IBM and SAP to run their audits, a direct conflict for defense work · Not an independent boutique; incentives are not purely buyer-side · Senior brand, junior delivery is a common pattern on engagements.
Independent enterprise-software advisory founded in 2014 and headquartered in Australia, with delivery across eleven major markets. It explicitly does not resell, implement or audit software, and its assessment work doubles as the first phase of a structured methodology — a mock internal audit that can run unbundled from remediation and negotiation.
Pros: Independent and vendor-agnostic — does not resell, implement, or run audits for vendors, and takes no commission · Broad vendor coverage (Oracle, SAP, Microsoft, IBM, VMware, ServiceNow, Salesforce, hyperscalers) · Structured three-phase methodology (mock internal audit, remediation, negotiation), available unbundled.
Cons: Audit-defence team is composed substantially of former vendor auditors — useful insight, but a vendor-side pedigree to note · Roots and centre of gravity are in Australia; New York and London are smaller satellite offices · Heavy reliance on anonymised testimonials and self-reported headline figures.
Independent multi-vendor licensing advisory with global positioning, covering compliance assessment, audit defense, negotiation and optimization across Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, IBM and Tier-2 publishers. Its stated model is fully impartial and buyer-side, with the ELP one of five service lines it runs on Microsoft.
Pros: States a fully impartial, buyer-side position with no vendor partnerships · Broad multi-vendor coverage including IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, and Tier-2 publishers · Spans audit defense, negotiation, renewals, advisory, and compliance assessment.
Cons: Generalist multi-vendor breadth rather than a single deep vendor niche · Boutique scale rather than a large global bench · Impartiality claim is self-reported and not independently audited.
Independent, buyer-side licensing boutique headquartered in the US, combining compliance assessment, audit defense and advisory across Oracle, Microsoft, IBM and VMware with continuous-monitoring tooling and a guarantee model. Its Microsoft ELP is built on live deployment data rather than a one-off snapshot, which keeps the position current between assessments.
Pros: Independent and buyer-side, with no vendor partnership or reseller relationship · Combines advisory and audit defense with continuous-monitoring tooling (ArxPlatform) · Guarantee-backed engagement model is unusual among independents.
Cons: Tooling-plus-services model may be more than a single one-off matter requires · Footprint is weighted to North America · Guarantee terms need careful reading for exact scope and exclusions.
Independent, buyer-side licensing boutique with global positioning, running compliance reviews across Microsoft, Oracle and SAP with particular current depth in IBM and VMware/Broadcom. A Microsoft assessment here sits inside a full-lifecycle practice that can carry the ELP forward into negotiation and renewal work.
Pros: Independent and buyer-side, with no reseller relationship · Strong, current IBM and VMware/Broadcom content — the two most volatile audit fronts in 2026 · Covers the full lifecycle from audit defense through negotiation and optimization.
Cons: Global positioning without a single local office can mean time-zone and on-site limits · Depth is weighted toward IBM and VMware/Broadcom rather than every publisher · Public outcome figures are self-reported and not yet independently verified.
London-headquartered independent SAM managed-service firm running multi-vendor software asset management and audit-readiness programmes for global organisations across eleven major markets. Its Microsoft ELP work is continuous by design: the license position is maintained between reviews rather than rebuilt for each one.
Pros: Independent managed-service model with no reseller relationship · Continuous, multi-vendor SAM that keeps the estate audit-ready between reviews · London-headquartered with global delivery reach.
Cons: Managed-service slant rather than dedicated litigation-grade audit defense · Ongoing-programme model may exceed the need of a one-off audit response · Breadth across many vendors can mean less depth than a single-vendor specialist.
Independent, buyer-side compliance boutique headquartered in the US with unusually broad coverage across Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, SAP, Quest, VMware and Red Hat, delivered across eleven major markets. As the name suggests, compliance assessment is the centre of the practice, with engagements running from the ELP through negotiation and optimization.
Pros: Independent and buyer-side, with no vendor partnership or reseller relationship · Unusually broad coverage spanning Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, SAP, Quest, VMware and Red Hat · Covers the full lifecycle from audit defense through negotiation and optimization.
Cons: Newer to the independent directory, with a public track record still being verified · Breadth across many vendors can mean less depth than a single-vendor specialist · Published outcome figures are self-reported until the verified registry is live.
India-based independent boutique covering Microsoft and Oracle compliance assessment, audit defense and software asset management across eleven major markets, with its own SAM tooling. Its Microsoft ELP work pairs that tooling with an Oracle-honed measurement discipline, and continuous monitoring rather than point-in-time review.
Pros: Independent, stated as not an Oracle partner or reseller, which keeps its incentives buyer-side · Strong Oracle pedigree paired with Microsoft coverage · Own SAM tooling supports continuous monitoring, not just point-in-time defense.
Cons: Vendor coverage concentrated on Oracle and Microsoft rather than a broad multi-vendor estate · Newer to our registry, with team scale and tooling still being verified · Delivery outside India and APAC may be remote.
Listed, not ranked — alphabetical order throughout.
| FIRM | HQ | COUNTRIES SERVED | TYPE | INDEPENDENCE | SERVICES ON MICROSOFT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anglepoint | US | Global (11 markets) | Large ITAM / SAM services firm | No — vendor-side audit work and Microsoft SAM partnership | ELP, SAM, audit defense |
| CDW | US | US, Canada, UK (3 markets) | Reseller (VAR) | No — resells licenses | ELP, advisory, audit defense |
| Deloitte | GB | Global (11 markets) | Big Four | No — runs audits for some publishers | ELP, advisory, audit defense |
| Invictus Partners | AU | Global (11 markets) | Independent advisory | Yes — does not resell, implement or audit | ELP, audit defense, negotiation, renewals, advisory |
| ITAA | Global | Global (11 markets) | Independent advisory | Yes — self-reported, no vendor partnerships | ELP, audit defense, negotiation, renewals, advisory |
| LicenseFortress | US | Global (11 markets) | Independent boutique + tooling | Yes | ELP, audit defense, negotiation, renewals, advisory |
| Licensing Data Solutions (LDS) | Global | Global (11 markets) | Independent boutique | Yes | ELP, audit defense, negotiation, renewals, advisory |
| Livingstone Technologies | GB | Global (11 markets) | Independent managed-SAM firm | Yes | ELP, SAM, audit defense |
| Redwood Compliance | US | Global (11 markets) | Independent boutique | Yes | ELP, audit defense, negotiation, renewals, advisory |
| Rythium Technologies | IN | Global (11 markets) | Independent boutique + tooling | Yes | ELP, SAM, audit defense |
An ELP is only as useful as it is trustworthy, so the central question in this cell is who benefits from the number. Seven of the ten firms are independents: their only revenue is your fee, whether the position comes out clean or short. Within the seven, the delivery shapes differ — Livingstone and Rythium maintain the position continuously, LicenseFortress pairs it with monitoring tooling and a guarantee, Invictus runs it as a mock audit, Redwood and LDS fold it into a full lifecycle, ITAA runs it as one of five service lines. The other three carry ties that change the reading: CDW’s assessment sits next to a resale relationship that benefits when gaps are closed with purchases; Deloitte is appointed by some publishers to run their audits; Anglepoint conducts IBM audits vendor-side and holds a Microsoft SAM partnership. Each of those facts is disclosed in the profile above — for some buyers the scale and certification of a large firm outweighs them, for others they are disqualifying. That judgement is yours.
The independence test gives you the questions that surface these ties in a first call, and the Microsoft compliance assessment selection guide covers the rest of the evaluation — methodology, tooling, deliverable format and what a defensible ELP actually contains.
The directory’s neutral rules apply everywhere: alphabetical order, balanced pros and cons, never a ranking.
Every registry firm covering this work →
Audits, negotiation and the firm directory →
What an ELP engagement involves →
The metric most ELPs turn on →
Ten firms for when the letter has landed →
Every field guide on the site →
No. The ten firms appear in strict alphabetical order with balanced pros and cons reused from their directory profiles. Independence is shown as a pro; reseller, Big-Four or vendor-side ties are shown as a con — both stated as factual trade-offs for you to weigh, never as a verdict.
The registry cell for Microsoft compliance assessment lists twenty-eight verified firms. Ten were selected for documented ELP practice depth and a deliberate mix of provider types: seven independents, one reseller-attached practice, one Big-Four firm and one large SAM firm with vendor-side audit ties, so the comparison shows real incentive contrasts. The full cell is at the Microsoft firm directory.
It is the construction of an effective license position (ELP): a reconciliation of what your organisation has deployed and assigned against what it is entitled to. On Microsoft that means Microsoft 365 assigned-versus-active seat analysis, SQL Server and Windows Server core counts, CAL coverage including multiplexing, Azure Hybrid Benefit eligibility, and dev/test environments — assembled into one defensible statement of where the estate stands.
Timing and control. A compliance assessment is commissioned by the buyer, on the buyer’s clock, and the results stay private — it is how you find and fix gaps before Microsoft or its partners ask. Audit defense starts when a SAM engagement or audit letter has already arrived and the vendor controls the timetable; the audit defense comparison covers that scenario. A current ELP is the single strongest asset to hold when a letter lands.
Because the market includes them, and the directory’s job is to show the real landscape with the trade-offs stated. CDW’s assessment work sits inside a resale motion; Deloitte runs audits for some publishers; Anglepoint conducts IBM audits vendor-side and is a Microsoft SAM partner. Each fact is shown as a con alongside the firm’s genuine strengths, so you can weigh it — not a reason to hide the firm from the comparison.
Tell us about your Microsoft estate, your markets and your timeline, and we will route your brief to firms that genuinely cover this work. The directory and matching are free for buyers, no vendor ever sees your brief, and we add no markup.
Our weekly dispatch on vendor audit programs, regional developments and one buyer move. Subscribe to The Licensing Radar.