We performed a comparison between Methodware Kairos and RSA Archer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, AuditBoard, Trend Micro and others in GRC."The most valuable feature is the ability to import and export using industry standards like XMI and XML metadata interchange managing the data in and data out."
"I have found all the features to be valuable, including those involving reporting, the dashboard, notifications, email modules, the database and data input."
"Even non-technical people can be masters of the product."
"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 is a very rich application. I like its adaptive suggestion, where based on your users and the class of data, it can actually recommend you the proper control to choose. For example, we have been using PCI DSS as an NIST. So based on application feedback, it will provide you with a suggestion on which control objective needs to be set. Based on that, you can make a decision—you don't need to take the suggestion, but you can customize that particular provided suggestion. RSA Archer's workflow is also good, in terms of process automation."
"One of the useful features is the ability to connect to various systems in order to accommodate data."
"The solution has helped our organization manage our internal and external activities."
"Flexible record permissions and data import features."
"It has various valuable features. For example, showing us if a control aligns with specific standards or frameworks helps us understand it better and verify its compliance."
"We are currently working on making Essence one hundred percent compliant and we are not there yet."
"The bullet chart is the best graph for my purposes, and it should be available for inclusion in the dashboards."
"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."
"There are certain restrictions on API integrations, and it is not simple or straightforward."
"The user interface needs work. There are many small text boxes, like credit card size's boxes, where we need to input a lot of text. You can't see what you're typing beyond the tiny window, so you have to scroll or type elsewhere and copy-paste it. It's very inconvenient."
"In a future release, there should be an option to upload the main data."
"The solution as a whole could be simplified."
"Solution could use more inbuilt applications."
Methodware Kairos is ranked 16th in GRC with 2 reviews while RSA Archer is ranked 1st in GRC with 38 reviews. Methodware Kairos is rated 9.0, while RSA Archer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Methodware Kairos writes "Meeting industry standards now and for the future, straightforward setup, with reliability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RSA Archer writes "A rich application with good workflow, but search feature needs improvement". Methodware Kairos is most compared with , whereas RSA Archer is most compared with OneTrust GRC, IBM OpenPages, MetricStream, Workiva Wdesk and AuditBoard.
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.