Architecture Certifications: TOGAF vs. iSAQB CPSA-F

IT Architecture is a broad discipline, and there is no single certification that makes someone a “better architect.” Instead, the right certification depends heavily on the type of architecture you want to practice.

For enterprise architecture, TOGAF remains one of the most prominent certification paths. The current TOGAF portfolio includes TOGAF Enterprise Architecture Foundation, TOGAF Enterprise Architecture Practitioner, and TOGAF Business Architecture Foundation, alongside more focused credentials such as Agile, Digital, and EA Leadership.

For professionals focused more directly on software and solution architecture, the iSAQB Certified Professional for Software Architecture (CPSA) is a better alternative.

The foundation level certification CPSA-Foundation Level (CPSA-F) is designed around the practical responsibilities of software architects: understanding requirements and constraints, designing architectures, communicating architectural decisions, evaluating quality, and documenting solutions.

There are, of course, other architecture-related certifications and frameworks. Depending on your career direction, you might encounter certifications around cloud architecture, security architecture, business architecture, data architecture, or specific technology ecosystems. The key question is therefore not simply “Which architecture certification is best?” but rather “Which kind of architect do I want to become?”

TOGAF vs. iSAQB CPSA-F

The most interesting comparison is between TOGAF and CPSA-F because, despite both being architecture certifications, they address different architectural levels.

	TOGAF Enterprise Architecture	iSAQB CPSA-F
Primary focus	Enterprise architecture	Software architecture
Main perspective	Organisation and transformation	Systems and Solutions
Typical concerns	Strategy, business, information, technology, governance and transformation	Design, quality, requirements, architecture decisions and documentation
Key method/concept	TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM)	Software architecture principles, methods and techniques
Typical audience	Enterprise architects, transformation leaders, business/solution architects	Software architects, developers, technical leads and solution architects
Practical emphasis	Structuring and governing architecture across an enterprise	Designing and evaluating software systems
Best fit	“How should the organisation evolve its architecture?”	“How should we design this software system?”

It's about altitude...

A useful way to think about the distinction is altitude.

TOGAF operates at a relatively high altitude. An enterprise architect may be looking across business capabilities, applications, information, technology platforms, organisational change and governance. The TOGAF ADM provides a structured approach for developing and evolving that enterprise architecture.

CPSA-F operates closer to the ground. A software architect might be deciding between architectural styles, decomposing a system, managing quality attributes, documenting architectural decisions, or evaluating whether a design satisfies its functional and non-functional requirements. The iSAQB curriculum is explicitly organised around these architectural activities.

That makes the certifications complementary rather than direct competitors.

A senior solution architect, for example, could reasonably benefit from both: CPSA-F to strengthen software architecture skills and TOGAF to understand how those technical decisions fit into a broader enterprise architecture and transformation context.

The bottom line

TOGAF answers the question: “How do we architect and transform the enterprise?”

CPSA-F answers the question: “How do we architect the software?”

Neither certification is inherently better. They develop different architectural muscles. If your ambition is to move toward enterprise strategy, governance and transformation, TOGAF is compelling. If you want to become better at designing and evaluating software systems, CPSA-F is probably the stronger choice.

And if your career sits between the two worlds—as many solution and senior software architects do—there is a strong argument for eventually learning both.

So, which one?

If you're a software engineer → software architect, I'd lean toward CPSA-F.

If you're a solution architect → enterprise architect, I'd lean toward TOGAF.