We performed a comparison between MEGA HOPEX and RSA Archer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two GRC solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is very interactive."
"It's excellent for supporting decision-making."
"The main feature I find crucial in MEGA HOPEX is the catalog view, which provides a comprehensive visualization of all artifacts in one repository. Another valuable aspect is the availability of out-of-the-box outcomes, such as strategy maps and BPA models, eliminating the need for additional configuration. MEGA HOPEX allows users to focus on specific business areas, like risk management or data governance, providing a high-level overview while enabling deep dives into specific areas of interest. For risk management, MEGA HOPEX allows users to assess impacts, create recovery plans, and track action plans."
"The most valuable features of MEGA HOPEX are the seamless VPA module and the good user experience. There are built-in connections that provide integration with other platforms, such as ServiceNow. There is a lot of customization available allowing a lot of freedom. The solution is updated frequently adding new features. For example, the feature GraphQL can be integrated into other solutions, such as ManageEngine for ITSM solutions. You are able to use GraphQL to connect APIs and query the APIs."
"I find the IT portfolio management very valuable and helpful."
"An advantage is its accessibility."
"What's most valuable in MEGA HOPEX is that it follows the reference model where each component is defined. I also like the diagram consistency in MEGA HOPEX."
"The most valuable feature is the completeness of HOPEX's meta-model. It's a strong meta-model that's rigid but comprehensive. It's a logical fit for our understanding of how we want things modeled in our database."
"Good dashboards and reporting features; it's easy to gather reports quickly."
"Enables development of any application, automation of any workflow including the GRC work processes."
"It has the best workload management features."
"Solution is scalable."
"This solution helped us with the centralization of our governance data, so we could house all of our controls in one place. We could use that central repository of all our controls to build our risk management strategy and our policy and governance. So we could use controls as a central library and build policy, and then build risk management around it."
"The most valuable features are the advanced workflow and the dashboards. This tool can present data wonderfully to management, and it is easy for them to manage the risk plans."
"RSA Archer's best features are advanced workflow, reports, dashboards, and notifications."
"Integration is another great aspect of RSA Archer. From the beginning, integration has been a central focus for RSA, and Archer has always integrated well with most tools on the market today."
"The solution lacks additional models compared to other tools."
"The interface must be improved."
"I cannot recall coming across any missing features."
"The features are limited. I'm hoping in the future the solution will be bigger and include more items. Right now, overall, it needs more."
"The tool usability is weak and it also has a high learning curve."
"The initial setup can be quite complex at first."
"It has a data domain where we load our data objects onto the tool but doesn't provide data governance capabilities such as cleansing or validating data."
"They do tend to push people to their professional services, instead of helping the customers with their problems. I understand this is their business. At the same time, however, they need to work on fact sheets or offer some program to help the customers who want to implement it themselves and to make it run properly in their environment."
"Slow turnaround time from support team."
"Some of the error reporting isn't very clear. When you're looking for information on error codes, you got to do a lot of digging."
"There is no inbuilt alert in Archer to let us know that a data feed has failed or did not run for different reasons. So, we don't even get to know that a feed has not run until somebody reports it to us. This has been a problem all the time. Data feeds have always been a big headache for us because there is no feature to let us know if a feed has not run or has failed. If Archer had a feature to send us an email notification when a feed has failed, it would've been very helpful. This is the reason why our users are slowly moving away to another platform. Some of the modules that I have been managing are being moved to ServiceNow. Next year, a lot of our modules will be moved from RSA Archer to ServiceNow, and the data feed issue has been one of the main reasons."
"The ticket handling process could be improved."
"Performance could be improved."
"I would like to have the ability to build and maintain an inventory of personal data processing activities and assets utilizing a purpose-built taxonomy and data structure."
"Some areas are not truly automated but are only scheduled."
"In a future release, there should be an option to upload the main data."
MEGA HOPEX is ranked 5th in GRC with 37 reviews while RSA Archer is ranked 1st in GRC with 38 reviews. MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8, while RSA Archer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Interactive with good functionality and helps with productivity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Archer writes "A rich application with good workflow, but search feature needs improvement". MEGA HOPEX is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, ARIS BPA, Visio and Avolution ABACUS, whereas RSA Archer is most compared with OneTrust GRC, IBM OpenPages, MetricStream and Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance. See our MEGA HOPEX vs. RSA Archer report.
See our list of best GRC vendors.
We monitor all GRC reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.