Migrating from monthly subscription to usage-based billing for SaaS companies

Every flat monthly subscription you bill to customers who barely use your product creates friction, while power users who generate enormous value pay the same as everyone else. That misalignment between price and value is the central argument for usage-based billing, which is now mainstream, though adoption estimates vary by sample and definition. A January 2025 Metronome/Greyhound survey of 100 SaaS companies found 85% had adopted usage-based pricing, while Stripe reports that 74% of suppliers had adopted usage-based models as of 2026. These are separate cross-sectional studies with different populations, not two points on a single trend line. The shift is being driven by AI inference economics, cloud infrastructure costs, and customer demand for pricing that reflects actual consumption.

Key takeaways

• Hybrid pricing that combines a subscription base with usage charges is increasingly common, especially among AI-selling SaaS companies. In Salesforce/G2's 2026 study of 108 established SaaS companies ($10M to $250M ARR) selling AI products or AI-enabled services, 85% used two or more pricing models, 95% retained subscription as a foundation, and 73% layered usage pricing on top
• Migration sequencing reduces migration risk and can mitigate churn: launch for new customers first, then offer opt-in for existing customers, then roll out segment by segment
• Billing infrastructure needs reliable usage metering, rating, and transparent invoicing that customers can verify; high-volume products may also require real-time or near-real-time ingestion, along with identity mapping, deduplication, corrections, and auditability
• Event-level usage data strengthens traceability and dispute investigation. Salesforce/G2 reports that 23% of its AI-selling SaaS sample still manages hybrid pricing manually, and associates fragmented or manual operations with delayed invoices, billing disputes, revenue leakage, and reconciliation workload
• Customer communication matters throughout: announcement emails, pricing calculators, spend controls, and real-time dashboards can reduce bill surprise and the retention risk that follows it. Zylo's 2026 survey of 218 IT leaders found 78% reported unexpected charges tied to consumption-based or AI pricing in the preceding year
• In Zuora's 2025 study of 991 finance leaders, 95% of SaaS finance leaders surveyed said usage pricing makes revenue forecasting more difficult. Hybrid pricing can reduce some of that volatility by retaining a recurring base while adding a variable usage layer
• Billing automation, pricing execution, and revenue growth work best as one system built on granular raw usage events. Orb calls this revenue design, and it is what turns billing from a back-office function into a growth lever

Understanding the shift: Why SaaS companies adopt usage-based pricing models

The limitations of traditional subscription models

Flat monthly subscriptions create a fundamental misalignment between what customers pay and the value they receive. A customer using 5% of their allotted capacity pays the same as one consuming 95%. Traditional SaaS often had more predictable marginal delivery costs, while cloud consumption and especially AI inference can make COGS more directly sensitive to workload and usage, because inference costs vary by query and workload.

Traditional subscriptions can also create barriers to customer acquisition and expansion. Prospects may hesitate to commit to monthly fees before experiencing value, while existing customers can hit artificial ceilings that discourage deeper usage. The result can be lower conversion rates at the top of the funnel and compressed expansion revenue within your existing base.

Driving forces behind usage-based adoption

Three structural forces are accelerating interest in usage-based models:

• AI economics are pushing many vendors toward usage, credit, outcome, or hybrid pricing, though AI does not universally require usage pricing. Variable inference costs make consumption-aligned metrics attractive, but multiple approaches remain economically viable. McKinsey's November 2025 analysis found AI-native vendors split across 40% activity-consumption, 35% flat fee, 15% capacity, and 10% outcome-based pricing metrics, and Salesforce currently offers both consumption-based and per-user options for Agentforce. OpenAI currently meters its GPT-5.6 API models by input and output tokens, and Anthropic's May 2026 list prices likewise price Claude API models per million tokens. Token metering tracks computational consumption closely, though token volume does not necessarily map proportionally to customer value: a long, expensive generation can carry low business value while a short agent action carries high value.
• Customer expectations have shifted toward consumption-aligned options. Enterprise software portfolios are large and growing: Zylo's 2026 benchmark reports an average organizational portfolio of 305 SaaS applications, with a median of 240. Buyers increasingly favor consumption alignment without rejecting commitments outright. A 2025 survey of 100 CIOs reproduced by L.E.K. found 39% preferred usage-based pricing for AI applications, 23% hybrid, 21% seat-based, and 15% outcome-based.
• Product-led growth benefits from pricing flexibility. PLG motions generally work best with low entry barriers followed by expansion as usage grows, and fixed subscriptions can create friction at both ends of that journey.

Benefits for customers and businesses

Usage-based pricing can create alignment that benefits both sides of the transaction. Customers get a lower psychological barrier to entry with costs that scale with value received, and Orb's PLG billing foundations are built for exactly that motion. Businesses can capture expansion revenue as customers grow, sometimes without a discrete upsell, though contractual caps, commitments, negotiated discounts, renewals, and enterprise procurement can still require human intervention.

The association with growth is visible in current benchmarks, if not proven causal. In Maxio's 2025 Benchmarkit-based survey of 316 SaaS companies, hybrid subscription-plus-usage businesses reported the highest median growth rate, at 21%. That is a cross-sectional association rather than evidence that hybrid pricing itself caused the higher growth, and it should be read alongside the acquisition and expansion mechanics above rather than in place of them.

Key challenges in migrating to usage-based billing: Avoiding common pitfalls

Technical hurdles: Metering and data collection

Usage-based billing requires fundamentally different infrastructure than subscription billing. You need systems capable of:

• Real-time or near-real-time event ingestion at scale, potentially millions of events per day for high-volume products, with the latency profile matched to the product
• Reliable message delivery with deduplication and idempotency, so no event that represents billable usage is dropped or double counted
• Reliable identity mapping that resolves every event to the correct customer, subscription, and price
• Complex aggregation logic for time-based calculations, averages, maximums, and custom formulas
• Audit trails that connect invoice line items back to the underlying usage

Companies that attempt to bolt usage tracking onto existing subscription systems often discover gaps where events are lost, aggregations are incorrect, or audit trails are incomplete. These gaps create billing errors that erode customer trust and trigger disputes.

Building this infrastructure in-house is the most common starting point, and it tends to be a larger commitment than it first appears. Metering pipelines, pricing logic, invoice generation, and correction handling become their own product surface, complete with backlogs, uptime expectations, security and compliance requirements, and a high blast radius when something goes wrong. Several teams have chosen Orb instead of taking that on. Replit decided against building a replacement system internally because it would have delayed a key product launch by four to six months, and stood up Orb in one month with a single engineer. Knock saved six months of engineering time by fully automating usage-based billing with Orb. Pinecone avoided hiring a dedicated billing team and gained a trusted source of truth for a nuanced multi-product structure.

Operational complexity: Pricing and invoicing

Moving beyond flat subscriptions introduces operational complexity that finance and operations teams must handle:

• Mid-cycle changes when customers upgrade, downgrade, or add products during a billing period
• Proration calculations for partial periods that must be transparent and defensible
• Credit management for prepaid credits, minimum commits, and overage handling
• Invoice generation that itemizes usage clearly enough for customers to verify

Without proper tooling, these scenarios require manual reconciliation that scales poorly. Orb handles mid-cycle changes, proration, credits, commitments, and invoice generation natively within a single platform, so these cases resolve inside the billing system rather than in spreadsheets and one-off scripts.

Migrating an entire installed base at once also concentrates pricing and implementation risk. Current migration guidance favors new customers first, followed by voluntary opt-in and segment-based rollout, with higher-risk accounts handled carefully, and recommends running the new-customer approach for at least 60 to 90 days before affecting the existing base.

Financial implications: Revenue recognition and reporting

Usage fees are variable consideration, and revenue recognition under ASC 606 and IFRS 15 requires careful treatment of them. Recognition depends on the contract's identified performance obligations and the transaction-price allocation analysis rather than on a single universal rule. As KPMG's December 2025 software and SaaS handbook emphasizes, application turns on performance obligations, allocation, contract terms, and judgment. In qualifying arrangements that meet the variable-consideration allocation criteria, usage fees may be allocated to and recognized in the period to which the usage relates rather than estimated across the full contract term at inception. KPMG's 2025 IFRS 15 handbook includes a hosted transaction-processing example in which transaction-based fees are recognized in the period the transactions are processed.

Hybrid arrangements can produce different recognition patterns for fixed and variable consideration, but the outcome cannot be determined from the "fixed" versus "usage" label alone. Minimum commitments, material rights, licenses, upfront fees, and contract modifications can all change the accounting. Finance teams need systems that track these components separately and generate compliant journal entries automatically.

Essential billing engine capabilities for usage-based models

Handling diverse pricing structures

Modern billing engines must support a range of pricing models beyond simple per-unit charges:

• Tiered pricing with different rates at volume breakpoints
• Volume pricing where reaching a tier applies that rate to all units
• Package pricing for bundled unit blocks
• Dimensional pricing that varies rates across multiple axes such as region, instance type, and environment

Orb's dimensional price groups support pricing across multiple usage dimensions, such as region, instance type, and environment, using a single pricing configuration for dimension combinations.

Managing credits and mid-cycle changes

Prepaid credits are a fast-growing monetization model for usage-based and AI products. OpenAI currently supports prepaid API credits, and Anthropic currently bills API and Workbench usage through prepaid usage credits. Credits are not yet a universal industry standard, however: a 2026 survey reported by monetization researcher Kyle Poyar found 29% current AI-credit adoption among 230 companies, with another 33% planning to introduce them. Where credits are used, the model provides:

• Cash upfront for the vendor while maintaining usage flexibility for customers
• Simpler pricing communication than complex per-unit rates
• Natural expansion triggers when credit balances approach zero

Billing systems must track credit balances, handle expiration, and create proper accounting records for credit drawdown. Orb supports prepaid credits that can be platform-wide or SKU-scoped, alongside contract commits, discounts, and incentives. Opus moved to Orb for accurate credits-based billing with transparent balances, replacing per-invoice manual calculation with automated credits and overages that customers can see clearly. Mid-cycle plan changes require configurable invoice treatment: immediate charge, proration, or deferral to the next billing period.

Ensuring data granularity and accuracy

The foundation of accurate usage billing is capturing raw usage events with enough fidelity to reconstruct any charge. Systems that aggregate events before persisting them do not retain the granularity needed for:

• Retroactive pricing changes applied to historical usage
• Backdated adjustments for billing corrections
• Dispute resolution with event-level audit trails
• Usage analytics beyond what was anticipated at system design

Raw event architecture, where usage data is ingested and persisted before aggregation, supports every one of those scenarios. Orb's standard ingestion path retains granular raw usage events, which is what enables historical re-querying, backfills, backdating, and event-level auditability. For sustained ultra-high-volume workloads, Orb offers Hosted Rollups, which aggregate configured event streams during ingestion to deliver performance at extreme scale. Complex calculations applied to the retained data ensure invoices reflect the right price as pricing and volume evolve.

Streamlining finance workflows with usage-based billing

Automating AR and dunning processes

Usage-based models generally create more variable invoice amounts and heavier reconciliation requirements than subscription models. They may also involve more frequent billing, though invoice frequency is a design choice rather than an inherent property of usage pricing: Maxio reports that 43% of its surveyed SaaS companies bill more frequently than monthly. Manual AR processes built for predictable monthly invoices break down when amounts fluctuate and billing cadence increases. Finance workflows need:

• Automated payment collection with retry logic for failed charges
• Configurable dunning sequences that escalate appropriately
• AR aging reports that segment by account health and payment history
• Integration with payment processors for credit card, ACH, and other collection methods

Manual reconciliation remains a material operational burden. In Zuora's 2025 study, 100% of SaaS respondents said manual data issues and reconciliation work impeded strategic focus, and 42% said this occurred often. Billing automation that handles these workflows without manual intervention can reduce that burden and shorten revenue reconciliation cycles. Finance teams at Pinecone and Stytch chose Orb specifically to reach a single source of truth for usage and billing, so the numbers hold up even with spiky, usage-heavy workloads.

Accurate revenue recognition for dynamic pricing

Usage-based revenue recognition requires systems that track:

• Recognized revenue from delivered usage
• Deferred revenue from prepaid credits and advance payments
• Unbilled revenue from usage not yet invoiced
• Service periods at the line-item level for proper accrual

Creating detailed native ERP transaction records rather than summary imports can simplify reconciliation and audit support, but it is an implementation choice rather than an ASC 606 or IFRS 15 requirement. Orb's NetSuite integration syncs invoices, credit notes, and payment records, and Orb creates native transaction records rather than summary imports, which is what lets finance teams reconcile billing data and defend it in audits. Orb's revenue recognition is aligned with GAAP and ASC 606, and accounting period locks prevent retroactive changes to closed periods, with adjustments flowing forward instead. Orb also integrates downstream with ERPs and tax providers, including NetSuite, QuickBooks, Anrok, Sphere, and Avalara, while owning the billing logic itself.

Optimizing pricing strategy with tools for price evolution

Testing and deploying price changes safely

Pricing iteration is critical for finding the model that maximizes both customer value and revenue. But changing prices on live customers creates risk. Price evolution tools enable:

• Simulations that run against real usage data before deployment
• What-if scenarios showing projected customer and revenue impact across segments
• Scheduled changes that activate automatically at future dates and can be cancelled, with customizable invoice treatment
• Bulk and customer-level price changes applied without engineering work
• Dry runs and endpoint previews of API calls that show results without affecting production data

Teams can model the impact of a price increase on different cohorts, identify customers who would see significant bill changes, and prepare appropriate communication before making changes live. Dune used Orb to move from a simple binary pricing model to granular usage-based pricing with tiers and credits, and evolved that pricing repeatedly without drawing on engineering resources. Replit launched Autoscale with usage-based pricing while retaining the ability to adjust pricing up to a week before launch, and Vercel unlocked pricing agility across more than 60 SKUs.

Leveraging thresholds and alerts

Threshold billing triggers invoice generation when accrued usage charges cross defined amounts. Cloudflare's June 2026 documentation describes the same mechanism: a mid-cycle invoice generated when accumulated usage charges reach a threshold, which limits the amount that can accrue between invoices. Thresholds can support self-serve expansion motions by invoicing as consumption accrues, though converting a free-trial user to paid is a separate packaging and product decision rather than an automatic consequence of crossing an invoice threshold.

For usage-based products, threshold billing also limits unbilled exposure. High-volume API abuse can accumulate charges before end-of-month invoicing catches the issue, and invoicing at defined intervals caps how much can accrue unpaid. Invoicing alone does not detect or stop fraud, but when combined with payment authorization or access restrictions it can meaningfully limit losses, which is how OpenMeter's July 2026 explanation frames it. Orb positions threshold billing and balance alerts for exactly these runaway-spend and fraud-risk patterns, with webhooks that notify customers as spend approaches limits.

Enhancing customer experience and transparency in usage-based models

Providing clear usage visibility

Bill unpredictability is a significant retention risk in usage-based models, not merely a question of whether the price is fair. Zylo's 2026 survey of 218 IT leaders found 78% reported unexpected charges tied to consumption-based or AI pricing in the preceding year, and Stripe's 2026 migration guidance warns that customers can churn when they cannot estimate their bills. A technically accurate invoice still fails if the customer feels surprised.

Orb's Experience Kit addresses this with:

• Advanced real-time dashboards that help customers analyze and optimize usage across dimensions such as teams, locations, and metrics
• Pricing calculators that let customers estimate costs before they commit
• Checkout flows with draft-invoice visibility so charges are clear at the point of purchase

Orb also supports invoice-to-usage-event drill-down in its finance and revenue-reporting workflows, so any invoice can be explored down to the underlying raw usage event. Customers see historical context too: Stytch's customers receive dashboards containing bills, key metrics, and trends. This transparency turns billing from a source of friction into a tool for customer success. Customers can identify cost optimization opportunities, track ROI on their usage, and budget more accurately for future periods. Supabase saw the vendor-side benefit too: transparent invoices and reduced billing-related support after moving to Orb, alongside roughly 0.4% of revenue saved in fees and leakage.

Empowering customers with spend management

Beyond visibility, customers need control. Orb Spend Controls supports:

• Real-time spend monitoring across accounts and products
• Automated threshold alerts as customers approach spend limits or need top-ups
• Workflow triggers that fire when configured conditions are met
• Automated actions such as cutting off access when credits are depleted
• Dashboards for planning, optimizing, and monitoring spend

Orb separately supports contract commits, discounts and incentives, prepaid credits, and other enterprise pricing structures through its price-modeling capabilities. Together, these address the procurement concern that usage-based pricing creates uncontrollable costs. Enterprise buyers can approve usage-based products when they have governance tools that keep spend visible and bounded.

The technical backbone: Raw data layer and advanced metering

The power of granular usage data

The architectural choice that most affects billing flexibility is whether granular raw usage events are persisted or only aggregated totals are stored. Raw event persistence enables:

• Pricing model changes applied retroactively to historical usage without re-ingesting data
• Invoice corrections that recalculate affected periods automatically
• Usage analytics that answer questions not anticipated when the system was designed
• Audit support with event-level traceability behind charges

Orb's high-throughput metering handles billions of events per day for cloud-scale scenarios, with a persistent raw data layer that surfaces event logs and enables backdating and auditability. For sustained ultra-high-volume streams, Hosted Rollups pre-aggregate configured event streams during ingestion into time-based aggregates, delivering performance at extreme volume. Orb also supports SQL-based metrics, including billing-period averages, maxima, and minima, so finance teams can define billing logic in familiar query syntax.

Flexibility for retroactive adjustments

Real-world billing requires corrections. Contracts get backdated during extended negotiations. Infrastructure outages require usage credits. Pricing changes apply to existing customers at renewal. Systems designed for usage-based billing must support:

• Backfilling historical usage data when events arrive late
• Backdating price changes to specific effective dates
• Credit ledger updates that automatically recalculate after adjustments
• Draft invoice previews showing the impact of proposed changes

Orb's accuracy tooling updates invoices, credit ledgers, and customer-facing dashboards after a backfill, and supports backdated price changes and missing-event correction. Backdated billing adjustments trigger automatic recalculation while preserving an audit trail. These capabilities address enterprise billing scenarios that would otherwise fall back to spreadsheet reconciliation, which scales poorly and introduces errors.

Measuring success: Quantifiable outcomes of usage-based billing migration

Companies that migrate to usage-based billing on purpose-built infrastructure report measurable improvements across engineering, operations, and revenue metrics.

Engineering efficiency gains:

• Vercel decreased the time required to build and launch billing for new products by 80%, got up and running with Orb in three weeks, and later built and launched billing for a new product in three weeks
• Orb also reduced Vercel's need for temporary manual-reconciliation staffing by 50%
• Knock saved six months of engineering time by fully automating usage-based billing with Orb, freeing the team to focus on core product work
• Replit stood up Orb in one month with a single engineer instead of building internally
• More broadly, Orb says finance and product teams can make many pricing changes in minutes rather than waiting on a product sprint

Operations improvements:

• Before Orb, billing and invoicing took Stytch one full business day each month. With Orb, Stytch reports spending 75% less time on billing, saving roughly eight hours per month
• That reclaimed capacity moved to higher-value product work rather than reconciliation
• Pinecone reached a single source of truth for sophisticated multi-product usage-based pricing and avoided hiring a dedicated billing team
• Supabase gained transparent invoices and reduced billing-related support while saving roughly 0.4% of revenue in fees and leakage

Revenue growth:

• Orb reports that Replit saw 40x revenue growth since using Orb to monetize usage. Replit moved a new product to usage-based pricing and implemented Orb for that launch
• Expansion revenue is captured as customers consume more, often without a discrete upsell motion

These outcomes come not just from adopting usage-based pricing but from implementing it with infrastructure designed for the complexity of consumption billing.

Why Orb for usage-based billing migration

Orb approaches usage-based billing as revenue design rather than billing execution. The platform treats pricing as a strategic function integrated across product, finance, and GTM teams.

What sets Orb apart:

Raw event architecture retains granular raw usage events on the standard ingestion path, enabling historical re-querying, backfills, backdating, and auditability, with Hosted Rollups available for sustained ultra-high-volume streams. Complex calculations applied to that data produce accurate invoices as pricing evolves, and backfilling and backdating address the enterprise billing scenarios that otherwise create manual work.

One platform from metering to reporting brings metering, pricing, subscriptions, invoicing, AR, and revenue reporting together in a single system. That reduces the integration surface area between tools and keeps usage, invoices, and revenue data consistent, so a pricing change does not require coordination across several systems.

SQL-based metrics enable complex aggregations such as billing-period averages, maxima, and minima, plus custom calculations beyond simple event counts. Finance teams can define billing logic with far less engineering dependence, using familiar query syntax.

Dimensional price groups support pricing across multiple usage dimensions, such as region, instance type, and environment, using a single pricing configuration for dimension combinations.

Finance-grade integrations with NetSuite create native transaction records rather than summary imports, with downstream connections to ERPs and tax providers including QuickBooks, Anrok, Sphere, and Avalara. Revenue recognition reporting provides recognized, deferred, and unbilled views, and accounting period locks prevent retroactive changes to closed periods.

Customer-facing experience tools power real-time usage dashboards, pricing calculators, and checkout flows, alongside spend monitoring, threshold alerts, and automated actions. These capabilities help reduce billing disputes and improve customer satisfaction with transparent, verifiable invoices.

Orb frames the end state as three lanes that work together on top of granular raw usage events: automate billing so invoices stay accurate as contracts and models change, execute pricing so new models can be modeled, tested, and rolled out quickly, and grow revenue by using granular usage data to simulate models, spot upsell opportunities, and design monetization intentionally. When all three run on the same data, engineering is no longer the billing team, product can treat pricing as a first-class part of the product, finance can trust and explain the numbers, and customers understand what they are paying for.

Orb maintains SOC 1 and SOC 2 reports, and 99.99% SLAs are available for enterprise customers. At the top end of scale, Supabase processes over 1.5 million invoices per month through Orb.

For companies evaluating a migration from subscriptions to usage-based billing, Orb offers interactive demos and documentation to explore the platform's capabilities.

Frequently asked questions

What is the typical timeline for migrating from subscription to usage-based billing?

Migration duration depends on pricing complexity, data instrumentation, integrations, contract structure, and customer transition strategy, so published benchmarks should be treated with caution. What current guidance does specify is the customer-transition cadence: Stripe recommends collecting at least 60 to 90 days of new-customer data before expanding a new usage-based model to the existing base. The phased approach, starting with new customers before moving to existing accounts, extends the overall timeline but reduces churn risk. Platform readiness matters too: Vercel got up and running with Orb in three weeks, and Replit stood up Orb in one month with a single engineer.

How should companies handle existing contracts during a usage-based billing migration?

Existing agreements should be reviewed for pricing, term, amendment, and notice provisions. Grandfathering is a commercial migration strategy rather than a universal legal requirement. Common approaches include honoring existing pricing through renewal, offering voluntary early migration with incentives such as additional credits or discounted rates, providing conversion calculators showing estimated costs under the new model, and negotiating amendments where necessary. GitHub's 2026 Copilot migration is a concrete example: monthly users moved to usage billing in June while annual Pro and Pro+ customers initially remained on existing pricing until expiry. Sequence the migration so lowest-risk cohorts go first, with highest-value enterprise accounts last, after the model has been validated.

What metrics should companies track to measure usage-based billing success?

Beyond standard SaaS metrics like MRR and churn, usage-based models require tracking expansion revenue from existing customers, revenue per customer by consumption tier, time from signup to first paid usage, bill accuracy measured by dispute rate, and customer cost predictability measured through dashboard engagement. Finance teams should also monitor forecasting accuracy, comparing projected versus actual revenue, which matters given that 95% of SaaS finance leaders in Zuora's 2025 study said usage pricing makes revenue forecasting more difficult.

How do prepaid credits differ from pay-as-you-go usage billing?

Prepaid credits collect cash upfront while allowing flexible consumption, providing better cash flow for vendors and budget predictability for customers. Customers purchase credit blocks that draw down with usage. Providers may set expiration terms on those credits: OpenAI and Anthropic both currently specify one-year expirations for purchased API credits, though terms vary by provider and contract. Pay-as-you-go bills after consumption occurs, creating variable invoices. Many companies combine both: prepaid credits with discounts for commitment, plus pay-as-you-go rates for usage exceeding credit balances. Orb supports both models natively, including platform-wide and SKU-scoped credits, drawdowns, commitments, and overage handling in the same subscription.

What compliance requirements apply specifically to usage-based billing?

Revenue recognition under ASC 606 and IFRS 15 requires careful handling of variable consideration, and the outcome depends on the identified performance obligations, the allocation of consideration, and the contract terms rather than on the fixed-versus-usage label alone, as KPMG's 2025 software and SaaS handbook sets out. Tax treatment can vary by jurisdiction, product classification, delivery method, and customer or use case, and hybrid packaging can add classification and calculation considerations. Event-level or otherwise sufficiently granular traceability can strengthen billing controls, reconciliation, dispute resolution, and audit support, though the appropriate evidence and control design depends on materiality, systems, aggregation methods, contract terms, and the audit approach. For organizations whose billing systems fall within SOC 2 scope, appropriate access, change-management, and logging controls may form part of the control environment; SOC reporting provides assurance over controls addressing risks arising from service organizations, with the relevant control set determined by the system description, risks, criteria, and controls in scope.