10 Equity Tracking Software Picks for Founders

Do not index

Your spreadsheet probably handled the first few founder grants without much trouble. Then the company added SAFEs, an option pool, new investors, board approvals, advisor equity, and a diligence request that asks for a clean ownership history by tomorrow. At that point, the problem isn't just calculating percentages. It's keeping legal documents, vesting records, stakeholder access, valuation work, and financing scenarios aligned.

The right equity tracking software depends on where the company is going, not just where it is today. A pre-seed team may need a simple cap table and reliable document workflows. A Series A or Series B company may need investor and counsel familiarity, global plan administration, accounting reports, integrations, and migration support. Some founders prioritize fundraising modeling, while others need employee administration and exercise tracking first.

The picks below are evaluated through that operating context. I'm looking at capabilities, pricing transparency, stage fit, limitations, migration effort, integrations, security, and compliance questions. The goal isn't to crown one universal winner. It's to identify the system your team can keep accurate as ownership becomes more complicated.

1. Carta

Carta remains the default comparison point for many US startups because investors, lawyers, finance teams, and employees already recognize it. The platform combines private-company cap table management with equity plan administration, document storage, electronic signatures, 409A valuation workflows, reporting, and scenario modeling. Its product range can support a company from early formation through more complex compensation and liquidity programs.

The Free Launch tier can make Carta practical for very early companies that need to move beyond a spreadsheet without immediately committing to a larger software budget. As the company grows, Carta can support option and RSU administration, ASC 718 reporting, compensation workflows, tax services, and liquidity-related needs. That breadth is useful when the finance function starts coordinating with counsel, payroll, and auditors.

Where Carta fits best

Carta is strongest when stakeholder expectations matter as much as product functionality. A US startup preparing for institutional fundraising may benefit from using a platform that prospective investors and counsel already know. The system's permissions, audit-oriented records, exports, and document workflows are also suited to diligence.

The trade-off is cost predictability. Pricing can scale with stakeholder count, and paid tiers often require a sales conversation. Add-ons for compensation, tax, or liquidity can expand the total cost of ownership, so founders should request a complete quote rather than evaluating the base plan alone.

Carta is a strong choice for US companies expecting fast growth, but smaller teams should avoid paying for enterprise breadth they won't use. Keep investor research and fundraising execution separate from the cap table itself, and use Gritt.io's funding round resources when the ownership record is ready to support targeted outreach.

Visit Carta's equity management plans

2. Pulley

Pulley is built around the startup workflow, with cap table management, equity plan administration, electronic signatures, SAFE and note support, scenario modeling, pro formas, and 409A valuation assistance. Its positioning is especially attractive to founders who want a modern alternative to a legacy platform without giving up core fundraising and equity administration capabilities.

Its clearest advantage is pricing visibility. Pulley publishes pricing tiers and offers contractual pricing commitments, which gives founders a better starting point for budgeting than a platform that reveals everything only after a sales call. That doesn't mean the software stays inexpensive forever. Stakeholder-based pricing can still rise as more employees, advisors, and investors enter the system.

A practical migration option

Pulley's onboarding and support model is a meaningful differentiator for companies moving away from spreadsheets or another cap table provider. Managed services are available for complex migrations and specialized structures, including web3 or hybrid arrangements. That support can reduce the risk of importing an incomplete history and discovering errors during a financing.

The product may be a better fit for early and mid-stage companies than for organizations demanding every advanced enterprise feature found in the largest incumbents. Founders should test the workflows for board approvals, option exercises, historical transactions, investor access, and reporting before assuming the platform will cover every later-stage requirement.

Pulley also presents a clear security posture, but a founder shouldn't treat a public security page as a substitute for procurement review. Ask about role-based permissions, audit logs, data retention, exports, API access, and the process for correcting a historical transaction.

For a pre-seed or seed company, Pulley offers a strong balance between startup usability, support, and pricing clarity. For a larger company, it deserves a structured feature and migration comparison against the requirements of finance, counsel, payroll, and auditors.

Explore Pulley's equity platform

3. AngelList Equity in Stack

AngelList Equity is embedded in Stack, AngelList's broader operating environment for incorporation, banking, and Roll-Up Vehicles. That connection makes it particularly relevant for founders raising from many smaller investors or using AngelList's fundraising workflows. Rather than treating every investor as a separate metered stakeholder, Stack uses a team-member-based pricing model.

That pricing structure can make budgeting easier when a company has a broad investor base. The platform also supports automatic cap table updates for founder stock, SAFEs, and options, along with bulk import tools. Roll-Up Vehicles can consolidate many small checks, which may simplify the ownership record and reduce administrative clutter.

The platform dependency matters

The main limitation is availability and product context. A standalone cap table product may not be broadly available outside specific Stack flows or users, so founders should confirm eligibility and scope before designing their operating process around it. A tool can look ideal during fundraising and become less convenient if the company later needs workflows that sit outside the AngelList ecosystem.

Late-stage auditor and counsel familiarity may also be less universal than with long-established providers. That doesn't make the system unsuitable, but it raises the importance of testing exports and asking legal and finance stakeholders whether the resulting records meet their expectations.

AngelList Equity is worth considering when the company already uses Stack or expects a financing structure with many small checks. It's less compelling if the team wants a fully independent equity system with broad third-party integrations and a long-established enterprise support model.

Founders should also keep the ownership workflow distinct from investor discovery. Once the financing structure is clear, Gritt.io's investor search workflow can help identify and filter relevant angels and venture funds without forcing fundraising activity into the cap table tool.

Explore AngelList Stack

4. Fidelity Private Shares

Fidelity Private Shares takes a document-centered approach to private-company equity administration. It provides a live stock ledger and cap table connected to source documents, 409A request workflows, financing and equity reports, granular permissions, and collaboration features. The data-room linking is especially relevant for founders who want diligence materials and ownership records to remain connected rather than scattered across folders and email threads.

That structure can improve readiness for investor, counsel, and board review. If a reviewer asks why a holder appears on the cap table, the team can work from the related source documentation instead of reconstructing the answer from an old spreadsheet and a collection of attachments.

A good fit for document-heavy teams

Fidelity's brand and compliance infrastructure may reassure companies that want a provider with established financial-services capabilities. Granular permissions also matter when founders need to share selected information with counsel, investors, board members, finance staff, or employees without exposing the entire ownership record.

The product is a newer entrant relative to some incumbents, so integration depth and ecosystem familiarity are still important diligence questions. Pricing isn't broadly published and is typically sales-led, which makes it difficult for a small company to estimate total cost without a detailed conversation.

Ask for a product demonstration using your actual source documents. Test how the system handles amended agreements, converted instruments, board approvals, option grants, and a financing scenario. Also ask whether exports preserve the relationships between the ledger and the underlying documents.

Fidelity Private Shares makes the most sense for companies that value document-to-cap-table linkage and service infrastructure. It may be more than a young startup needs, but it can become attractive when diligence quality and permissions are central operating concerns.

Review Fidelity Private Shares

5. Morgan Stanley at Work

Morgan Stanley at Work, including Shareworks and Equity Edge Online, is designed for advanced equity administration across private and public companies. Its capabilities cover complex global equity plans, cap table administration, participant services, ASC 718 and IFRS reporting, and preparation for IPO or liquidity events.

That scope makes it a natural candidate for late-stage private companies with substantial employee programs, international operations, or a clear path toward public-company administration. Large issuers can also benefit from integration with Morgan Stanley's workplace and participant services.

Don't confuse scale with startup simplicity

For a pre-seed or seed company, Morgan Stanley at Work may introduce more implementation effort, process overhead, and cost than the team needs. The platform is enterprise-focused, and pricing and engagement are generally sales-led rather than optimized for a small founder team comparing self-serve plans.

The strongest use case is a company whose equity program has already become an operational function involving HR, finance, payroll, tax, legal, and employees across regions. In that environment, detailed reporting and compliance capabilities can matter more than a lightweight interface.

Before selecting it, define the transition point that justifies enterprise administration. Ask how long implementation takes, which historical records the provider will migrate, who owns validation, and how employees will access grants and transaction information. A late-stage company shouldn't wait until a liquidity event to discover that its historical data needs substantial cleanup.

Morgan Stanley at Work is best evaluated as infrastructure for a mature equity program, not merely as a digital replacement for a founder spreadsheet. If you're still issuing occasional founder or advisor grants, a startup-first platform may be easier to operate and less expensive.

Visit Morgan Stanley at Work's cap table management page

6. Schwab Stock Plan Services

Schwab Stock Plan Services focuses heavily on award administration and participant experience. Its capabilities include recordkeeping for options, RSUs, and performance awards, employee portals, brokerage integration, and a private-company equity management solution built on Qapita that can support growth toward public-company programs.

The practical advantage is continuity for employee equity administration. A company that expects to move from private awards to a broader public-company stock plan may prefer a provider with participant education, brokerage services, and established workplace infrastructure.

Strong participant service, variable cap table depth

Schwab has historically been optimized for broad employee plan administration, so founders shouldn't assume its cap table functionality will match every startup-first platform. The relevant question is how thoroughly the system handles SAFEs, notes, founder stock, advisor arrangements, option pools, board approvals, and financing scenario models.

Pricing and contracts are sales-led, and the product is generally better suited to larger customers. A small startup may find that the employee portal is excellent while the broader ownership workflow still requires additional systems or manual coordination.

Ask Schwab to show the complete path from grant creation to employee acceptance, vesting updates, exercise, reporting, and brokerage integration. Confirm which tasks your internal team can handle and which require provider support. Also test exports before signing, because a participant portal doesn't automatically guarantee a finance-ready cap table.

Schwab is a sensible option for companies prioritizing employee-facing administration and a future public-company transition. It's less compelling for founders who mainly need simple fundraising modeling and early-stage ownership records.

When equity is part of a broader hiring strategy, founders can separately use Gritt.io's investor and benefits resources to research investor relationships and partner opportunities.

Explore Schwab Stock Plan Services technology

7. Astrella

Astrella, part of Equiniti and AST, is a service-heavy alternative for private-company cap table and equity plan administration. It emphasizes immutable audit trails, compliance-oriented recordkeeping, multi-currency support, workflows for portfolio managers, HR, and legal teams, and white-glove onboarding and migration.

That service model matters when a company is switching providers after years of inconsistent records. Migration is not just a matter of uploading a CSV. The team must reconcile grants, amendments, transfers, cancellations, exercises, vesting, and source documents. A provider that helps map and validate that history can be more valuable than one with a longer feature list.

Designed for teams that want operational help

Astrella's support for portfolio managers and larger private companies broadens its appeal beyond a single startup. Multi-currency support can also matter for organizations with international stakeholders or cross-border administration.

The main trade-off is pricing visibility. Founders generally need to engage sales for a quote, and the interface or feature depth may vary compared with the largest incumbents. Publicly advertised switching offers, including claims about reducing Carta invoices, should be evaluated against the full contract, implementation scope, support model, and future stakeholder costs.

Request a written migration plan. It should identify who owns source-data cleanup, how discrepancies are documented, who signs off on the imported ledger, and what happens when a legal document conflicts with an existing spreadsheet entry.

Astrella is a good candidate for a founder who values hands-on migration and ongoing service. It's less suitable for a buyer who wants fully transparent self-serve pricing and a minimal implementation burden.

Review Astrella's cap table management platform

8. Eqvista

Eqvista targets early-stage US startups with transparent pricing, freemium access, ESOP administration, waterfall and exit modeling, pro formas, electronic signatures, and bundled 409A support. Its free cap table tier supports up to 20 stakeholders, while paid plans use published per-stakeholder pricing. Those details are documented on Eqvista's pricing page.

The appeal is straightforward. A cost-conscious founder can start with a low-entry option, model ownership and potential outcomes, and add valuation support without immediately buying a broad enterprise platform. Published tiers also make it easier to compare the initial software cost against a spreadsheet, outside counsel, or a more sales-led provider.

Watch the cost curve

Per-stakeholder pricing can become less attractive as the company adds employees, advisors, investors, and option grants. Founders should model the expected ownership record rather than judging the price only against today's holder count.

Eqvista's smaller ecosystem may also mean less investor and counsel familiarity than Carta or Pulley. That can increase the value of clean exports and a documented review process before a financing. Ask your counsel whether the reports they need are available in the plan you're considering, particularly for securities, vesting, option pools, and financing scenarios.

The 409A bundles are useful for teams that want valuation work connected to the equity system, but founders still need to understand the timing and responsibility for each refresh. Software can organize the process, but it doesn't replace legal or tax judgment.

Eqvista is a reasonable fit for early-stage companies that prioritize price transparency and modeling. It becomes less compelling if the company expects a rapidly expanding stakeholder base or needs an established enterprise ecosystem.

9. Cake Equity

Cake Equity is built for startup teams that want fundraising and equity administration in one relatively approachable workflow. It supports cap tables, vesting, board approval workflows, SAFEs, convertibles, options, electronic signatures, fundraising modeling, stakeholder portals, and 409A support on higher tiers.

Its clearest stage fit is pre-seed through Series A. At that point, founders often need to formalize grants and financing instruments without adopting a platform designed primarily for global public-company administration. Plan-based annual pricing with included stakeholder counts can also make initial budgeting easier than a model that charges separately for every participant.

Useful breadth for a young company

Cake's templates and integrated signing can reduce the number of disconnected tools involved in issuing SAFEs, convertible instruments, and option grants. Scenario modeling helps founders understand proposed financings before approvals are complete, while board workflows provide a more disciplined record of governance activity.

The limitations become more important as reporting obligations expand. Some advanced US reporting and compliance capabilities may require higher-priced tiers, and Cake has less investor familiarity in the US than Carta. A company planning a near-term institutional round should ask counsel and lead investors whether they're comfortable receiving diligence materials from the platform.

Test the full process with a realistic transaction. Include a new grant, vesting change, board approval, financing scenario, document signature, and export. The best early-stage tool is the one the team will update after every transaction, not the one with the longest feature list.

Cake Equity suits founders who want transparent startup-oriented workflows and bundled annual plans. It may require a later reassessment if the company develops global equity, advanced accounting, or enterprise reporting needs.

Review Cake Equity pricing

10. Mantle

Mantle is a newer founder-focused platform built around a clean cap table experience, stakeholder management, SAFEs, options, scenario modeling, pro formas, and an AI assistant called Mantle Clerk. Its free Starter tier and flat-rate paid plans with unlimited stakeholders address a common founder frustration: uncertainty about how software costs will change as the ownership record grows.

That pricing structure can be attractive for a company adding employees and investors quickly. Founders can also use the modeling tools to evaluate a round or option pool change without rebuilding the spreadsheet each time. Early users have reported hands-on setup help, but the newer ecosystem means buyers should validate those experiences directly during a trial.

Simplicity is the product decision

Mantle's clean modeling experience may suit pre-seed and seed teams that want to stay close to the numbers. The free tier can lower the barrier to adoption, while flat-rate pricing avoids the immediate concern that every additional stakeholder creates another charge.

The trade-off is maturity. Mantle has fewer third-party attestations than legacy vendors, and some advanced enterprise features and integrations are still developing. That matters if the company needs established auditor workflows, broad API coverage, complex global plan administration, or extensive payroll and accounting connections.

Ask for the current integration roadmap and security documentation. Confirm how the AI assistant handles sensitive equity data, whether actions are logged, how users can review generated outputs, and which workflows still require manual verification. The platform should support founder judgment, not obscure the underlying ownership model.

Mantle is compelling for a young company that values simplicity and predictable pricing. A company approaching a complex Series B administration environment should compare it carefully with providers that have longer enterprise operating histories.

Visit Mantle's equity pricing page

Top 10 Equity Tracking Software Comparison

Product	Core features	UX & trust ★	Pricing / Value 💰	Target audience & USP 👥 ✨🏆
Carta	Cap table, equity plans, 409A, scenario modeling, e-sign	★★★★★ Mature, audit-ready	💰 Sales-led; scales with stakeholders; Free Launch tier	👥 Startups → late-stage; ✨Deep add-ons (comp, liquidity); 🏆 Widely recognized
Pulley	Cap table, ESOP, SAFEs/notes, 409A, scenario modeling	★★★★ Clear UX; strong onboarding	💰 Published tiers; predictable pricing	👥 Early–mid startups; ✨Transparent pricing & managed services; 🏆 Good support
AngelList Equity (Stack)	Auto-updating cap table, RUVs, team-member pricing, AngelList integration	★★★★ Integrated with fundraising flows	💰 Team-member pricing (investors not metered)	👥 Companies with many small investors; ✨RUVs + AngelList linkage
Fidelity Private Shares	Live stock ledger, 409A workflows, doc linking, granular permissions	★★★★ Fidelity-backed; compliance-first	💰 Sales-led; quote-based	👥 Diligence-focused private companies; ✨Doc-to-cap-table linkage
Morgan Stanley at Work	Global equity plans, ASC718/IFRS reporting, IPO readiness, complex reporting	★★★★★ Enterprise-grade; global compliance	💰 Enterprise pricing; sales-led	👥 Late-stage & public issuers; ✨Deep reporting & global scale; 🏆 Institutional trust
Schwab Stock Plan Services	Award recordkeeping, participant portals, brokerage integration	★★★★ Strong participant services	💰 Sales-led; suited to larger orgs	👥 Employee-heavy programs; ✨Participant portals & brokerage integration
Astrella	Cap table, multi-currency, immutable audit trail, migration services	★★★ Service-heavy; compliance-focus	💰 Quote-based; switching incentives	👥 Companies switching providers & portfolio managers; ✨White-glove onboarding
Eqvista	Freemium cap table (≤20), waterfall/exit modeling, 409A bundles	★★★ Budget-friendly; smaller ecosystem	💰 Freemium → low per-stakeholder tiers	👥 Cost-conscious early-stage founders; ✨Transparent low-cost bundles
Cake Equity	Cap table, SAFEs/convertibles, e-sign, fundraising modeling, vesting workflows	★★★ Simple UX for startups	💰 Transparent annual plans with included stakeholder counts	👥 Pre-seed–Series A teams; ✨Templates & bundled workflows
Mantle	Cap table, scenario modeling, AI assistant, flat-rate pricing	★★★★ Founder-focused UX; newer player	💰 Free Starter; flat-rate paid plans (unlimited stakeholders)	👥 Founders seeking predictability; ✨AI assistant & flat pricing; 🏆 Predictable cost model

Choose the System You Can Keep Accurate

The best equity tracking software is the system your team can update after every transaction and defend when investors, counsel, finance, or auditors ask questions. A polished interface won't compensate for an incomplete source ledger, unclear permissions, missing documents, or a migration that nobody owns.

Start with the company's actual securities. Confirm that the platform supports founder stock, preferred stock, options, RSUs, SAFEs, convertible notes, warrants, advisor equity, transfers, repurchases, and cancellations where relevant. Don't assume that a product built around a basic cap table will handle the governance and conversion issues that appear when informal arrangements become institutional financing structures. Early departure rules, cliff protection, freeze points, and the conversion from an informal split model into a fixed cap table can create more risk than simple ownership math, as this analysis of Slicing Pie problems explains.

Keep a current view and a fully diluted view. The current view should show issued and outstanding equity, while the fully diluted view models option pool expansion and convertible conversions before a term sheet is signed, as outlined in this cap table software guide. Founders should also update the record after every grant, exercise, transfer, repurchase, convertible signing, or other equity event rather than waiting for the next financing. A cap table summarizes legal documents, and regular reconciliation reduces the chance that the summary drifts away from them, a point covered in this equity management overview.

Match the system to the next operating stage

A pre-seed team usually needs fast setup, reliable document storage, simple stakeholder permissions, SAFE and note support, and pricing that doesn't punish early experimentation. Seed companies should add board approvals, option-pool modeling, employee communication, and a repeatable export process. By Series A and Series B, finance and counsel may need stronger audit trails, accounting reports, valuation workflows, payroll or HR connections, and a migration plan that survives diligence.

Stock option compliance also needs a calendar. A 409A valuation should be obtained before the first option grants and refreshed annually, with an update within 30 days of a material event according to this cap table tracker guide. If employees leave, track vested options and exercise deadlines actively. Most startup option plans give employees a 90-day post-termination exercise window, and unexercised options can return to the pool only after the required documentation is complete, as described in this cap table management guide.

Test the workflow, not the feature list

During evaluations, run a realistic transaction through each finalist. Import historical documents, create a grant, approve it, update vesting, model a financing, produce an investor report, and export the data. Then test the connections your team uses:

Payroll and HR: Confirm that employee identities, start dates, departures, vesting, and grant data can move reliably between systems.

Accounting: Verify support for the reports and data your finance team needs, including relevant equity compensation workflows.

Investor outreach: Keep investor discovery and relationship management connected operationally, but don't force those activities into the cap table ledger.

Exports and APIs: Ask whether exports are complete, readable, versioned, and available without provider intervention. Test API limits and field mapping before committing.

Security and permissions: Request documentation covering access controls, audit logs, data retention, encryption, incident response, and administrative roles.

Pricing deserves the same scrutiny. Compare stakeholder charges, included users, valuation fees, reporting tiers, managed services, implementation fees, exercise administration, tax support, and liquidity add-ons. A low initial quote can become expensive when the company adds employees or needs compliance services. A higher quote can be justified if it includes migration, review, and ongoing administration that would otherwise fall on the founder or finance lead.

Migration should happen in stages. First, clean the source ledger and identify every discrepancy. Next, import historical documents and reconcile ownership, vesting, instruments, approvals, and cancellations. Have counsel or finance review the result, document who owns validation, and establish a recurring update and export process. Don't wait until a financing forces the team to discover that old grants were never reconciled.

For additional perspective, compare this shortlist with cap table software for 2026, then make the final choice based on operational fit rather than brand recognition. The market has moved well beyond a niche back-office category. One estimate valued equity management software at USD 517.75 million in 2022 and projected USD 1.9 billion by 2032, implying a 14.3% compound annual growth rate from 2023 to 2032; another estimate put the market at USD 1.25 billion in 2025 and projected USD 3.56 billion by 2034 at a 16.4% CAGR. These projections from market coverage of startup cap table management point to sustained expansion, but growth in the category doesn't make every product suitable for every founder.

Choose the platform that keeps the legal record clear, makes dilution visible, gives stakeholders the right access, and creates less reconciliation work over time. That's the defensible software decision.

Gritt.io complements your equity system by helping you discover, filter, analyze, and contact relevant angel investors and venture capital firms by stage, sector, and location. Once your ownership records are organized, visit Gritt.io to build a targeted investor pipeline, manage outreach, and move your next round forward with less manual research.