Grant Thornton vs Forvis Mazars: DORA Compliance Services Compared
Quick verdict: Forvis Mazars ranks higher overall (65/100 vs 64/100) on our methodology, largely on mid-tier strengths. Choose Grant Thornton if its focus on banks or its premium pricing fits your situation better.
| Criteria | Grant Thornton | Forvis Mazars |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 3.9 out of 5 | 3.9 out of 5 |
| Overall score | 64/100 | 65/100 |
| Category | Mid-tier | Mid-tier |
| Headquarters | London, United Kingdom | Paris, France |
| Founded | 1924 | 1945 |
| Pricing band | Premium | Premium |
| Gap assessment | Yes | Yes |
| DORA audit | Yes | Yes |
| Consulting | No | No |
| Resilience / pen testing | No | No |
| TPP register | No | No |
| Entity types served | 4 | 4 |
Where Grant Thornton is strong
- Strong mid-market financial-services advisory footprint across the EU and UK
- Combined regulatory, audit, and cyber capability under one network
- Proportionate approach suited to mid-sized financial entities
Where Forvis Mazars is strong
- Strong European, especially Continental, financial-services regulatory heritage
- Integrated prudential-regulation and ICT-risk advisory
- Well positioned for EU-headquartered financial entities
Which should you choose?
Choose Grant Thornton if…
- You are a banks.
- You want premium-tier engagement economics.
- You prioritise strong mid-market financial-services advisory footprint across the eu and uk.
Choose Forvis Mazars if…
- You are a banks.
- You want premium-tier engagement economics.
- You prioritise strong european, especially continental, financial-services regulatory heritage.
Frequently asked questions
Is Grant Thornton or Forvis Mazars better for DORA compliance?
Forvis Mazars scores higher against our methodology (65/100 vs 64/100), but the right choice depends on your entity type, budget, and which pillars you need most.